[wonder_er]

It perhaps ignores the validity of your approach to your relationship to the state, but it's a stretch to say it's naïve.

FWIW, I used to be solidly in the "social contract" camp, and over the last few years have walked out of that camp, na'er to return.

Want to see how that argument feels when reversed?

"Your blind adherence to the maintenance of the state, despite vast evidence that it's a force of oppression shows an incredibly naïve view of the goodness and trustworthiness of man and institutions composed of members of the human race."

See? not much fun. Lets get a little more nuanced, and talk about, perhaps, at which point might a society by improved by ignoring the "social contract". Do you think that point CAN be reached? If so, when? What must we do when it IS reached?