“Lord of the Flies,

1. Assumin" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">ing that you are a social contractarian, and agree that a society arises from a contract to which we brin" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">ing our voluntary consent (and dissolves when such consents are withdrawn), is the recent movement “Not My President” a case of endin" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">ing a social contract? Are such activists now bound to obey the laws of the state, especially after January 20th? Would the state still contin" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">inue to have jurisdiction over them, especially in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in 2017? State your premises and your conclusion and explain" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in your argument, if necessary by usin" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">ing some examples. Be sure to explain" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in the notions of explicit, tacit, and hypothetical consent. 2. Assumin" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">ing that you do not accept Locke’s notion of private property, and do not accept that the Commons exist only so that we can produce private property out of it, construct a critical argument that shows that Locke’s theory could easily lead to widespread exploitation of different societies and their cultures. Next try to give Locke some defense. What virtues can we still see in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in Locke’s theory? 3. In the movie “Lord of the Flies,” we see a group of pre-teen schoolboys (unaccompanied by elders) gradually descend in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">into a condition that Hobbes calls the State of Nature. Now suppose that the boys were accompanied by their mothers/motherin" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">ing persons as per Virgin" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">inia Held’s theory. Would there still arise a State of Nature? Or, what would emerge in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">instead is a primitive tribal society, not exactly a state of nature, but every bit as murderous? I shall be evaluatin" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">ing your papers primarily in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in terms of: a) how carefully you have read the material, b) how well you have understood it, and fin" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">inally, c) your ability to thin" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">in" rel="nofollow">ink critically about the topic.