Rousseau

Rousseau’s The Social Contract deals directly with the issue of individual autonomy and freedom. The Social Contract spells out individual's rights and duties to the state. Rousseau removes representatives from the political equation and promotes direct democracy and egalitarianism in the purest form. In order to achieve Rousseau's egalitarian utopia he argues that man must “be forced to be free” and educated in way which today resonates with totalitarianism regimes. The Social Contract speaks of socially engineering through “educating” citizens to follow the nationalistic vision. Rousseau’s work promotes freedom yet also eliminates any notice of its true existence in the people.

To understand The Social Contract, one must first grasp Rousseau's view of man, the state of nature, his transition to civil society and societies' impact on man. Rousseau believes the wild man, a “noble savage”, in the state of nature to be more free than the civilized man. “Man is born free, and everywhere he is in chains.” The wild man in the state of nature is innately asocial, at peace and without morality, only with the materialization of society does man fall to become cruel and brutish. However, Rousseau does not argue for a return to the state of nature, he acknowledges the need for cooperation. According to Rousseau's work, the formation of inter-human relationships is the proximate factor behind the emergence of disorder and vices that have since their arising, generated conflict.

The causes of inequality and disorder in civilized society are direct repercussions from the formation of private property, the gathering of people in societies, and laws to ones property. Inequality arose from laws created to enforce the rights of property owners,...

... middle of paper ...

...g yourself to be free. When a person disobeys the Sovereign they are disobeying themselves.

Compared to John Locke and Thomas Hobbes, Jean-Jacques Rousseau represents the most liberal views. Hobbes, being the most conservative of the three, believes the state of nature to be in a state of war, without morality and constantly in fear but essentially equal. “Life is nasty, brutish, and short... a condition of war of everyone against everyone” said Hobbes. He professes the goal of government is to prevent a return to the state of nature and protect the citizenry from their own nature. Locke takes a more moderate path, he claims man had unlimited freedom in the state of nature, however the advantages and limitations of society far outweighed that initial freedom. He shows great distrust in the government and believes its purpose lies in persevering man's natural rights.