Paperwhat extent Rousseau s Social Contract Theory is valid nowadays? Political Theory
Kabdrash
Introduction
Jacques Rousseau was one of the thinkers who considered human nature along with state structures to solve social and political problems. In his work The Social Contract the main issue that he raises can be formulated as follows: Is it possible to find a way of governing a principality so that it suited both the state of nature and civil laws? In fact, this question still has not found its answer. Nevertheless, I think that many issues that Rousseau wrote about have found places in the way how modern states are governed nowadays. In this paper I will support my opinion by analyzing Rousseau s Social Contract theory, and giving examples how his statements are related to the real world. In order to investigate his theories, I classified his work into two categories: 1) concerning the ways a society is formed, and 2) the ways a state is formed. Firstly, I will analyze the first and second one separately giving examples of its applications in modern countries. Then, I will try to answer the question to what extent Rousseau s social contract theory can be justified and applied.
1. Rousseau s Social Contract Theory. Structure of society
primitive societies existed before confessing a social pact? Hobbes defined the state of nature of people as war of all against all (Hobbes, ch: XIII). To the contrast, Rousseau made his own concept that state of nature of individuals is not a war, but a natural disunity. He explains that war is already a product of an intercourse, and that it does not exist in the state of nature (Rousseau, 46). Then Rousseau talks about might and right. Concerning might or strength, he says that there is no concept of strength of the stronger, because it disappears along with the source of that strength, or if there is someone who is stronger. When it comes to right or freedom of right, Rousseau says that, it is common for everyone. So, every individual by nature has a freedom (Rousseau, 43-46). But, Rousseau s first postulating which opens his book, and which is the main problem he wanted to solve is the following: man is born free, but everywhere he is in chains (Rousseau, 41). So, he refers to the problems of inequality, injustice and slavery. He argues that Force made the first slaves, and their cowardice perpetuated the condition (Rousseau, ch: 4). Nevertheless, he says that people always had a necessity to unite. Because, when the necessity to self-preserving overweighs the striving for natural freedom, they voluntarily alienate their freedom and power in order to be in the society, and in that way to be safe. That means that every individual give all their rights to the society. But how they benefit then? So, this is the main purpose of the social contract - to make such form of organization, in which every individual give his natural liberty and take it (liberty) from the society. His liberty and power return to him within the community. In addition, everyone takes back not only what he gives, but more power to preserve it as well. So, making a social contract, every individual moves from the state of nature to the civil state, creating a society, a government. What does it mean? Rousseau asserts that, first of all, people themselves change: instinct is replaced with the sense of justice and with equality principle (Rousseau, 53). I think, Rousseau found the right reason why people unite, which is self-preserving, but his conclusion that social contract would make people again equal, as it was in primitive societies is wrong. So, for Rousseau, it was enough to put people to the same conditions, giving the same education and that it would equalize everyone. Famous French thinker, Voltaire, said an opposite argument: In our unhappy world it is impossible for men living in society not to be divided into two classes: The rich who command, and the poor who serve ... human race is as it is - different (chnm.gmu.edu). I agree with Voltaire, not because there necessarily should be poor and rich, but because of unequal human nature: you can not teach everyone to play music, to write poems, or to make surgeries. People have different preferences; they are born different, think and act differently.asserts that along with movement to civil state property acquisition appears. He also says that in the state of nature there is no such thing. Because if one captured something, it is not guaranteed that another one can not do the same (Rousseau, ch: 9). It is very similar to the right of the strongest. While entering the social pact, individual give everything to the society: power, fre...
