As far as I understand, the US “social contract” is at least on the level of ideology that if you “pull yourself up by the bootstraps”, you get to “live the American Dream”. When they talk about people “rejecting the social contract”, what they mean is that they don’t think that they are getting what they want out of society at large. If it’s few people that do this, you get criminals and sovcits.

You’re probably right, emphasis on “probably” because the term is so vague we don’t really know what anyone who uses it really means. By the terms you’ve put forth, I too “reject the social contract” of “pulling yourself up by the bootstraps” allowing you to “live the american dream” on account of those words not having any real meaning. As an american, I can draw my own meaning from those words, but it will differ from the meaning others put on those words.

This theory is just to explain why people at large behave differently if they perceive their society as good, just, liveable, honourable and all manner of positive things.

And that’s the thing, because it’s different to each person, we’re all talking about different contracts, that we don’t understand but we assume about each other, causing difficulties in communication.

I’m happy to discuss law, constitution, policy, morality, etc… but discussing a “social contract” to me sounds like we’re just discussing the unspoken assumptions of others.

As for my social contracts, those who know, know, you know?