Rousseau’s theory of the Social Contract

Jean Jacques Rousseau (1712-78), one of the greatest French philosophers in the eighteenth century, revealed his famous theory of the “Social Contract” in his master piece, “Du contract social” (trs. as The Social Contact). In this theory, “Rousseau returns to the defense of democratic, republican ideals modeled upon ancient Sparta, and centered upon the idea of freedom as active participation in politics and legislation.” However, the theory of social contract of Rousseau is somewhat different from those of Hobbes and Locke.

The first chapter of the Social Contract opens with these famous lines –

“Man is born free, and everywhere he is in chains. One man thinks himself the master of others, but remains more of a slave than they are.”

According to Rousseau, man was instinctively free, generous, simple, brave and vigorous. There was no hatred, conflict or negative quality in them, as described by Hobbes. They were happy in the ‘State of Nature’. There was perfect freedom and equality. They were noble savages, kind and sympathetic towards their fellow people, and far away form vice and sin. But this state of perfect happiness did not continue for long time. With the growth of population and the rise of private property, there began disorder among the people. To get rid of this situation they felt the need of law, institution, society and government. At last they made a contract among them and for the sake of forming society they gave the right to govern them to the ‘General Will’ (not to any king). They made contract with all and each. Thus, all depended upon each and each upon all. In short, each was under the control of the community as a whole. The community was sovereign. The ruler was a subordinate authority.

The General Will is the most critical and most important aspect in the Social Contract. “The conception of Rousseau’s mind seems to be this: every man’s political opinion is governed by self-interests, but self interest consists of two parts, one of which is peculiar to the individual, while the other is common to all the members of the community.” Actually the latter one is emphasized in General Will: General Will is neither ones personal will nor the will of the majority. Rather it implies the good will of the entire community. It will be clear by the following example – After having won in a war, the army of Corinth gained a piece of gold. Then the army said that it should be divided among them, as they had fought against the enemy. On the other hands, the people claimed that they should be given it because the army was reared by their money. However there was another opinion that they should buy a war–ship to protect the foreign attack by selling the piece of gold. By this example, Rousseau wants to imply the first opinion as the will of the minority, the second as of the majority, and the third as the general will.

Rousseau advocated direct popular government so that the people themselves could express the General Will in a meeting, and could be involved with the law making function of the state. The government should exercise the executive function. People must obey the decisions of the General will. The citizen is ‘forced to be free’ by being constrained to follow the General Will.

The main features of Rousseau’s theory are following –

·         The State of Nature was pre-political

·         The contract was collective and the purpose was to bring goodness for all.

·         Equality and freedom of people were kept.

·         By this contract they received more than what they lost.

·         Low is the expression of people’s will.

Importance of the Social Contract:

·         The Social Contract inspired the French Revolution as well as many other revolutions for personal freedom.

·         Though it had limitations, it wanted to do the welfare of people.

·         It has an important role in the growth and development of modern democracy.

Criticism:

·         When Rousseau speaks of democracy, he means, as the Greeks meant, direct participation of every citizen, representative government he calls ‘elective aristocracy’. Since the former is not possible in a large state, his praise of democracy always implies praise of the city state. (Russell, P-669)

·         The Social Contract has no historical evidence that how and when this contract was introduced. So, it is an imaginary thing.

·         There is a possibility of rising totalitarianism.

·         Everyone is bound to abide by the general will. So, it may hamper personal freedom.

In fine, it can be said that by this illogical contract Rousseau wanted to establish welfare of the people. On one hand, he speaks of democratic value. But on the other, he tells us the sovereignty of the state. So he may be called a Totalitarian Democrat.