Continuing Dubiousness of Social Contract

It occurs to me that anarchists are not the only folks who can lay claim to not requiring anyone to believe or uphold that mysterious concept known as social contract. Monarchs are individuals and as such, require a much simpler and psychologically healthy contract- one with themselves. This is how we lived for much of human history- even in tribal situations, governance arose via personal interaction and negotiation. Certain traditions become institutionalized, so I'm not suggesting that abuse didn't happen, or that various misconceptions weren't promulgated- but any so-called modern state is incomprehensibly gigantic compared to their monarchical predecessors.

In contrast, a 'social contract' removes the person one would normally contract with and replaces it with an abstraction of everybody. It's also an abstraction of contract- nobody has ever actually written down what's supposed to be in this contract, and what it tends to replace isn't just a contract, but the fullness of relationships developed in freedom over a lifetime. The political class needs the patina of authority, so they steal it- they take away parental rights, they tell farmers, butchers, and hairstylists what to do, and just generally transgress- for wherever there is a relationship, no matter how arbitrary, they need to subvert the natural subsidiary levels of authority. Such parasitical insertion of state between people is also the way they thieve; any transfer of goods must be pilfered.

Since there is no clear signatory to the social contract, the destructive can imagine those injured by their behavior aren't, in fact, 'everybody.' The unfortunate calculus of the 'common good' makes it's appearance here- the obvious fact that some will suffer due to this or that policy decision is suggested to be less relevant because the common, another abstraction, are more important than that Lazarus fellow outside your gate.

Nah, instead we'll bail out financial companies, again. We are discovering these companies don't actually have the right to foreclose, that they have put up fraudulent documents into courts in order to foreclose. I am hoping that the state governments, which stand to receive some tax income and whose politicians could enjoy some popularity for sticking up for the little guy, can overcome the pressure from the federal government- which will almost certainly be to change the laws so that these companies can continue to do what they want to. As it stands so far, the myopia of social contract seems to suggest we must endure massive lawbreaking on the part of corporations (as well as government bureaucrats for that matter) for the good of America. You'd think they all have mistranslated bibles, and devoutly believe the irresponsible shall inherit the earth.