There is a core problem with society, and it’s that you don’t get to decide whether you live in it or not, not really at least. The thing is, you can’t exist in a society without participating in it. And you aren’t allowed to participate in society without engaging in it. So the conclusion is that you must engage in society, follow cultural norms, and embrace specific ways of thinking. So what if you don’t want to do as such? 

Say I want to go to a fancy event with a formal dress code. I can’t wear cargo shorts, because it’s against the rules. There is no inherent morality in regards to whether wearing shorts is good or bad. It is simply a social convention that the organizers of the event have adopted to fit their vision. Now I could choose to not engage with their rules and thus I would not participate in the event. But this cannot be expanded to the concept of society as a whole. If someone disagrees with the current state of affairs in politics, the economy, and etc, you cannot just tell them “why don’t you go live in the woods on your own?” The fact that I own material objects and hate capitalism is not a “paradox” or “hypocrisy”. Because I exist in this environment without my consent. It is not a reasonable request to ask someone to leave society if they are unwilling to engage in it. The basic benefits of health, life sustaining resources, and social interactions are all intrinsically tied to society. For most people, these human necessities are required for living a fulfilling life. 

The bright side is, social conventions and norms can be changed. Not easily, but it’s definitely possible. Social movements and civil rights movements have been doing this for ages. But even changes in simpler public perceptions are also gradually possible. Getting tattoos used to be somewhat frowned upon. But they have since been normalized. The idea is that in order to participate in society, you must obey its rules. But those rules can be changed. I can influence the organizers to allow cargo shorts. Get enough people on board and the status quo changes. The question of whether a change should or should not happen is dependent entirely on the will of the population and those who are willing to invoke change. You are free to try and normalize open mouths while chewing but you must understand that its social acceptability needs to be dependent on the masses.

The problem comes down to when people are absolutely unwilling to engage in society. The question is, do we have a right to deny them participation in society? There is no answer to this question. If I decide I want to forfeit all of the benefits of living in a society, I reject capitalism and steal everything to survive. Even thoughI renounced the social contract, I will still suffer the consequences and benefits against my will. They will place me in jail and clothes me, feed me, and provide me with shelter. Or if I decide to become homeless, jobless, and refuse to contribute to society in any meaningful way. Does society have an obligation to help me? 

The problem is that people exist in a society without their consent. Should they still be entitled to the benefits of living in a society even without engaging in it?