government out of gratitude (Simmons 183-190). It maintains that this means supporting the government, including obeying its laws as part of the repayment. Simmons contends that it is not sufficient for the gratitude account of political obligation merely to demonstrate the existence of debts of gratitude to the government. He believes it must also be shown that the content of the debts is such that individuals will be willing to consider them political obligations. The gratitude account theory can be defeated merely by pointing out that even if individuals did owe such debts, the content of the debts would not mean that they owed the state any political obligation.
Acknowledging indebtedness acknowledges only a vague indebtedness, not bound by any particular conduct other than reimbursing anyone for their expenses incurred in the process of benefiting someone (Simmons 165). Obeying laws and supporting the government are very specific obligations, and political obligation would not be obligations of gratitude. Even though supporting the government and being law-abiding may be one way of repaying the debt, there are other ways in which gratitude could be repaid.
Simmons cites others on the topic who insist that the debt must be paid in obedience because it is necessary for a state to run efficiently, but Simmons does not go along with these theories (Simmons 186-187). He says that even if individuals work toward fulfillment of a particular need of the government, there is no obligation to do everything in their power to fulfill that need. Also, the fact that the government has a particular need that must be fulfilled for it to continue its existence, does not mean that an individual must work towards fulfilling that need out of gratitude.
Simmons concedes that his conditions three through five are generally met by governments, but admits he is uncomfortable in using something like gratitude as it is used in the in...