According to Jean-Jacques Rousseau, the main problem of modern societies is that they do not promote either equality or freedom. Therefore, he proposes a model of government that is based on the “general will”. As I am going to explain in details later on, the general will for Rousseau is the only way to promote the common good for the whole society. However, in my opinion, his model of government ensures equality at the expense of personal freedoms. In fact, he believes that people need to be educated to a common civic sense that allows them to pursue a greater good; but for me his education is a form of indoctrination and Rousseau’s perfect government is destined to degenerate in a totalitarian regime. Anyway, the idea of government proposed by Rousseau is very complex, and to better understand it, it is necessary to first analyze his view …show more content…
Actually, there is no class division at all: Rousseau’s society is a classless and a party-less one; otherwise, the creation of factions would lead the wealthiest people to pursue their own interests, and they would have the money to corrupt all the other voters. It is also the only government that ensures to its citizens the same liberty that they were enjoying in the state of nature, because nobody is imposing their own laws to the people, but they are doing what it is best for their own interests. They are free to choose their own laws according to the general will. It is very different from the ideas of government of Hobbes and Locke. The former, for Rousseau, has created a model of an authoritarian government which totally deprives men of their freedom; while the latter, who has based the need of a government on the protection of private property, has created a model of government that promotes
Rousseau takes more of a philosophical approach to the flaws with society and how the enlightenment attempts to fix these flaws. He says the only thing that separates man from animal is our sense of perfectibility. This in part promotes change in people in response to a change in the surrounding environment. As men come into contact with each other more frequently societies begin to form and the human mind begins to develop.
Rousseau’s beliefs coincided with the beliefs of other Enlightenment thinkers. This is shown when he writes, “Duty and interest thus equally require the two contracting parties [the people and the government] to aid each other mutually” (Document 3). In that period of history, it was typical for people to be ruled by a monarch and they had very little say, if any, in the laws and policies that impacted their day to day life. Rousseau felt that the system was outdated and it made citizens feel as if they were living in someone else’s home rather than their own, so he theorized that by fabricating a system in which the government and the people are forced to work together, it creates a sense of unity and equality. This works because “ … an offense against one of its members is an offense against the body politic.
The Primary objective of all leaders should be to control citizens. A society that allows authority to be challenged will never succeed. This source depicts an authoritarian or totalitarian view of what a governing body should look like. The author suggests that the primary objective of government should be the “control of the citizens”, and therefore that the individuals should entirely obey said government.
Rousseau’s beliefs coincided with the beliefs of other Enlightenment thinkers. This is shown when he writes, “Duty and interest thus equally require the two contracting parties [the people and the government] to aid each other mutually” (Document 3). In that period of history, it was typical for people to be ruled by a monarch and they had very little say, if any, in the laws and policies that impacted their day to day life. Rousseau felt that the system was outdated and it made citizens feel as if they were living in someone else’s home rather than their own, so he theorized that by fabricating a system in which the government and the people are forced to work together, it creates a sense of unity and equality. This works because “ … an offense against one of its members is an offense against the body politic.
However, Rousseau pertains to the American Revolution, and French Revolution because by his premise the Americans, and the French wanted equality. The Americans, and French came together through collectivism measures, and gave up their rights for equal gains. Rousseau philosophy was on the poor, or people with no power which clearly can be interpreted within the Revolutions.
Individuals are the building blocks of society, but they can’t dictate the way society flows. In the short stories “The Lottery,” by Shirley Jackson and “Harrison Bergeron,” by Kurt Vonnegut, and the theories of enlightenment philosophers, individuals can not change society. Tessie Hutchinson from “The Lottery,” tried to persuade her village that the tradition was wrong, but she faced death. While, Harrison from “Harrison Bergeron,” tried to overthrow society's ideas, through atrocious actions. The philosophers believed that the governors of society should be responsive and secure rights for the people.
Rousseau also influenced these ideas today by believing that the government belongs to the people. As a country, we have the power to control who is in the government by electing them. Before being elected,
The idea expressed by Rousseau in The People Should Have Power that “Man is born free. No man has any natural authority over others, force does not give anyone that right. The power to make laws belongs to the people and only to the people” influenced people who been suppressed by the royals and the aristocrats, and the independence of the United States is a perfect example for the Frenchmen to follow. Some people, such as historian Albert Mathiez, claims that leadership fell to the middle class with their knowledge of the ideas of the Enlightenment that “The middle class… was sensitive to their inferior legal position. The Revolution came from them- the middle class.
The questions of the whether social inequality is justified and the extent of government to address said inequality are some of the foundations upon which societies and economies are built. Two key philosophers on this issue – John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau – differ on this subject. In Two Treatises on Government, Locke holds that individuals have a right to property derived from their labor, citizens consent to the existence of inequality in society, and governments are instituted among men to protect said property. In contrast, Rousseau writes in Discourse on the Origin of Inequality and The Social Contract that inequality should be strictly limited and that governments have a duty to act in the best interest of its citizens by maintaining
In his work Discourse on the Origin of Inequality Rousseau presents the argument that political inequality is rooted in the origins of human sociality. He suggests that in the state of nature, only physical inequality existed. Thusly meaning that political inequality only came into being as a result of human beings shifting from undifferentiated oneness to differentiated individuals. He illustrates three main stages that lead to this (civil society): the development of village life, the social division of labor and the formation of government. In forming society, we as human beings entered into social relationships and so were able to socially construct agreed upon measurements of human worth (i.e. private property) and so create political inequalities.
He based his beliefs off of the ideas that all men are created good-natured, but society corrupts them. Unlike some other French Enlightenment thinkers, Rousseau believed that the Social contract was not a willing agreement. He also said that no man should be forced to give up their natural rights to a ruler. He came up with the solution that people should “give up” their natural rights to the community for the public’s good. He believed in a democratic government.
Rousseau, one of the most leading philosophers during the Enlightenment, had indeed left many of legendries behind. Not only his writings had caused many of the reactions at that time, but also influenced many writers’ aspects of the French Revolution and the overall understanding of inequality and the General Will. As one of the chief political theorists during the French Revolution who was also influenced by Rousseau’s ideas, Abbe Sieyes, published the pamphlet, “What is the Third Estate?” in 1789. This pamphlet was one of the documents that changed the world and lit the flame toward the French Revolution, as characterized by Joe Janes, a University of Washington professor (Janes).
This paper examines both Jean-Jacques Rousseau and James Madison remark concerning ‘ factions ’ as the potential destructive social force to the society. To layout and examine, this paper will first outline and discuss on Rousseau’s understanding of factions in The Social Contract,and Madison’s discussion on factionalism in the Federalist Papers 10.But there are many component surrounded with their view’s on ‘factions’,so it is important to consider together. Firstly,I will consider the definition and the element surrounded with their view on factions. With regard to Jean-Jacques Rousseau in The Social Contract,he believes that the society can only function to the extent that people have interest in common.
The French Revolution was undoubtedly influenced by the political theorists of the Enlightenment. The ideas of two French political theorists in particular are easily seen throughout the French Revolution, Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Baron Montesquieu. Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s thoughts and texts, such as the Social Contract, instilled the entitlement of basic human rights to all men. Rousseau’s concepts on rights combined with Baron Montesquieu’s ideas on government provided the backbone of a radical movement in the French Revolution known as the Terror. When one delves into the beginnings of the French Revolution, the motives and actions of the National Assembly, and the Terror of the French Revolution, one can obviously see the influence of two Enlightenment political theorists, Rousseau and Montesquieu.
In the 18th century, Genevan philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau influenced the French Revolution through his ideas and principals. In his book, The Social Contract, Rousseau said that every man is born good until corrupted by society. Rousseau was correct in saying that people were born good, people were naturally born with a pure heart because God made us that way. However, one could argue that man is born evil based off of the perspective of society’s moral laws, which Rousseau may not have considered. Man is born evil because every human being is born with a desire for possession and a hunger for power.