ABSTRACT
In both the history of political theory and popular consciousness, the idea that political obligations rest on consent has played a dominant role. The view is supported by major theorists, who argue that consent provides the best possible explanation of political obligations. The problem, however, is that most people have not in fact consented, either expressly or tacitly. Attempts to show that they have through such means as residing in their countries or voting do not bear scrutiny. Proposals to alter political arrangements to make it possible for more people to consent are also problematic. By influencing views concerning the standards a satisfactory account of political obligation should meet, consent has also created difficulties for attempts to develop an acceptable theory.
