The Social Contract is by no means a valid contract; but it is nevertheless an enforceable contract. Individual rights are predicated upon the very survival of individuals–on their right to life. But survival depends upon securing control of limited natural resources; and this cannot be won absent a limited state system, primarily a combined defense against competing human collectives; thus individual rights must be subsumed partially by a state system–at least to an extent necessary to perpetuate life itself.
A substantial benefit of this coercive state is the secondary freedom it affords most citizens to be productive in specialized areas, leaving the police/military, i.e. specialists, to provide for their protection. In such circumstances–far removed from any bitter individual fight for survival itself–the better aspects of human nature–albeit still flawed–flourish. Thus it proves a worthy trade-off: the balancing of a loss of individual liberty against a gain of community prosperity and security.
If technology ever advanced us to a point where an individual’s survival were either no longer dependent upon limited natural resources or could no longer be physically threatened by other humans, then the state, and with it the Social Contract itself, might be dissolved, naturally or by design.