The nights served the king and queens back then.......the swords and the lance where for protection......the knights wear armor for protection against other knight
Parthenon I believe.... that's what I last remember
So a social contract is where a "persons' moral and/or political obligations are dependent upon a contract or agreement among them to form the society in which they live".
Rousseau was most famous for coming up with the term but examples have always existed and exist right now.
An example of how a social contract works would be the legal system. For augments sake, if I say you stole all my money and you deny it, instead of fighting it out with fists or me raiding your house to find it with a gun, we both put our faith in the legal system which we both agree will be more impartial, and get to the truth. I surrender my right to take matters into my own hands on the condition that you will also do the same. Why did we do this? Because there are more benefits than not having this system in place. I may not be able to get personal revenge on you for stealing my money but I also am protected from people doing the same to me. People who are born in a state metaphorically "sign" the contract when they are born in order to live in the state.
A primitive example if you want would be that two people meet in the woods looking for berries. Both have guns and are distrustful of the other. They are constantly looking over their shoulders at each other out of fear which prevents them from going about their berry gathering. Eventually they both agree to a "contract" that they will both give up their guns at the same time. They do this because whilst you do not want to give up your gun, it means that you don't have to worry about getting shot in the back so times are more productive.
The theory is the same even if people disagree on why social contracts exist. Folk like Rousseau thought that social contracts arose because at the end of the day, humans are more interested in personal liberty and life and wish to avoid conflict as much as possible. More pessimistic people like Hobbes thought it was because humans are so naturally warlike that we needed social contracts to prevent our own violent natures.
I believe the answer is: the Root-Takahira Agreement
In the Root-Takahira Agreement, The united states government agreed to let go of American influence in China and not intervene in Japanese's effort to invade China. In return, the Japanese government had to hand over Philippines' territory to united states.
The correct answer to this open question is the following.
Some historians have argued that the American Revolution was not revolutionary in nature. Instead of fostering revolutionary change, it maintained continuity.
I think that the American Revolution was a genuine revolutionary movement stemmed from the anger and desperation of the American colonists that suffered many grievances from the British government.
The 13 American colonies had to pay heavy taxation such as the Navigation Acts, the Stamp Acts, the Tea Act. The worst part was that Colonists did not have any voice or representation in the English Parliament.
That is why colonists created secret groups such as the Sons of Liberty and people like Samuel Adams united other colonists against the English crown.
It is true that there were also some particular agendas inside the revolutionary movement, specifically, economic ones. But in essence, for me, it was a true independence movement.
