Pre-Class Week 10 Social Covenant

The issue of PSCs came up toward the end of our session this week and there seemed to be a fair amount of interest in the topic in the chat window.  Professor Tamara asked about the relationship between the social contract and privatization.  There are a lot of things to consider about Nationalism, Sovereignty, and IR, in dealing with the rise of PSCs and it got me thinking about the gated communities I see around Portland.  Can local politics be applied to IR?

What does the proliferation of these gated communities (GC) say about the State?  Portland consistently ranks as one of the most livable cities so why would anyone choose to live in a gated community?  
These artificial communities must provide something that the State can or will not provide? Certainly many of these GC provide residents with a sense of security.  Guarded gates and golf cart patrols are part of the package.  Recreational facilities are provided with obligatory golf courses as well as pools, health clubs, and meeting rooms.  How do these private recreational facilities change the relationship between the tax payer and the State?  If security services are provided at the very local level, is it necessary to support city or state police?  It seems that cities or local governments that allow for this type of privatization are encouraging the fraying of the social contract.  Living inside a GC allows you to redefine citizenship.

What about in US foreign policy?  I think some people in our class might have direct experience with the implications of life in the Green Zone in Baghdad.  If it is half as true as described by Rajiv Chandrasekaran in Imperial Life in the Emerald City, then it is no wonder that US policy did not lead to Iraqi stability.  I am interested to know if anyone in the class has direct experience in the Zone.(http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/17/books/review/Goldfarb.t.html?_r=0)

To revisit the question from class, I think that the social contract includes not only the recognition of giving up some freedom for security, but a more liberal notion that we also commit ourselves to a bit of altruism.  (Or at least enlightened self-interest)  It is the "Social" part that gets lost when the focus is on privatization and "contract".  Does it make a difference if we think of it as a "social covenant"?