The Freedom of Individual Citizens in Rousseau’s State

The Freedom of Individual Citizens in Rousseau’s State

“While uniting himself with all, [each associate] may still obey

himself alone, and remain as free as before."[1] While Rousseau would

claim that citizens in his state are free, much of the criticism

levelled against him is precisely because his state is seen as

authoritarian and against individual diversity.

Rousseau’s state is one created by all citizens in their own interests

and therefore guided by the ‘general will’, whereby laws are made to

promote the public rather than the private good. All citizens take an

active part in decision-making and are required to adhere to the

‘general will’. Sovereignty is a key word in examining Rousseau’s

state as it is held by the inalienable and indivisible body politic

that acts in accordance with the ‘general will’.

With this in mind, it is necessary to examine the meaning in politics

of the word ‘free’, as it is associated with many different meanings

and ideas, and indeed most ideologies and forms of governments or

states would relish associating themselves with the word in one form

or another. One of the most concise explanations of liberty or freedom

is by Isaiah Berlin in his Two Concepts of Liberty (1958). He

distinguishes between ‘negative’ liberty and ‘positive’ liberty.

Negative liberty consists of an absence of external restrictions

allowing the citizen to live free from interference. Positive liberty

is a newer concept and embodies the ability to be one’s own master and

become autonomous, often requiring government intervention to reach

self-fulfilment. These two meanings lead to different views about the

desirable rela...

... middle of paper ...

..., and apparently become ‘free’ in doing so. Rousseau

doesn’t confront this paradox, and it is hard to justify such a rule

even as ‘positive liberty’.

Therefore, Rousseau’s state can be seen as definitely more ‘positively

free’ than ‘negatively free’ but the freedom he aspires to goes much

further than most modern ‘positive liberals’ would go, in the amount

of state intervention in people’s lives. His ideas justify

totalitarianism, which in itself does not mean that individuals are

not free, but it is definitely not what most liberals would see as an

ideal state to foster citizens’ freedom.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

[1] Social Contract, Rousseau

[2] Social Contract

[3] Social Contract

[4] Social Contract

[5] Social Contract

[6] Social Contract