Comparing The Social Contract And Animal Farm

609 Words3 Pages
The Social Contract, by Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Animal Farm by George Orwell, has changed the way I look upon the world and more specifically our government. In The Social Contract, Rousseau discusses the contract between citizens within one’s country. Animal Farm is a satirical allegory of Russia’s Communist Revolution, and the dangers and ineffectiveness of communism. Both these books make me think about the power of language. And how it can be interpreted based off experiences. The Social Contract was written after John Locke and Thomas Hobbes had already developed their own “social contracts”. Unlike Locke and Hobbes, Rousseau believed that the social contract should be between the citizens, rather than between the state and the people. He believes that citizens shouldn 't have to give up any rights. He said that each citizen should give up all their rights to all the other citizens, but in return should receive equal amount rights from them. Rousseau was a supporter of violent revolutions; he believed that when the people aren’t satisfied with the government they have the obligation to overthrow the government. As a strong critic of the idea of property, he believed property caused greed and that the idea…show more content…
Jones and all humans, are unjust. He described a place where there were no humans and animals ruled; he spoke of a utopian society where everyone was equal. After Old Major’s passing, the other animals took over the farm and ran out Mr. Jones. After all of this the pigs, Snowball and Napoleon, took control of the farm. They used what Old Major had said to promote “animalism”, or what we would call communism. The pigs used “animalism” to their advantage and also changed its rules for their benefit. Old Major never meant for Napoleon to use his ideas of “sharing” to cause more problems for the other animals than before under Mr.
Open Document