Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Rousseau essay
Letter to the Editor Assignment Letter From Jean-Jacques Rousseau After reading an article written in The Globe and Mail describing Toronto’s current Mayor, Rob Ford’s latest scandal, there were various statements that caught my attention. It shocks me that such behaviour is tolerated by the community after receiving what I believe to be a disingenuous apology. I believe that Mayor Ford encapsulates everything that is wrong with our political system. His actions prove that he believes to be above the will of the people, taking advantage of his freedom when he should be putting the needs of the community first. Although it cannot be denied that Mayor Ford was elected into office by the choice of the public, that does not give him the right to act however he sees fit, he is merely a representative of Toronto. With this in mind, I contest that citizens of Toronto should be given the right to have Mayor Ford dismissed. Everyone is equal including Rob Ford, and he should not be above the general will of the public just because of his elected status. On the contrary, I believe it is the people who are a source of sovereignty and hold the greatest power, Mayor Ford has seemed to have forgotten his role in society, and his position within the political system. The article discusses that there is no way of removing him from office short of criminal charges, but they are incapable of obtaining sufficient evidence due to the fact that he was not in possession of any illegal substances. It is preposterous that such power can be given to one man, and stripped away from the community that gave it to him. I agree with the statement made in the article that there should be an impeachment process set in place in order to handle sit... ... middle of paper ... ... Reference List Bertram, C. 2012. Rousseau’s Legacy in Two Conceptions of the General Will: Democratic and Transcendent. Review of Politics. 74(3) pp. 403-419. Retrieved From: http://web.ebscohost.com.subzero.lib.uoguelph.ca/ehost/. Cullen, D. 2007. On Rousseau’s Democratic Realism. Perspective on Political Science. 36(4) pp. 207-209. Retrieved From: http://web.ebscohost.com.subzero.lib.uoguelph.ca/ehost/. Stanila, A.M. 2012. The Nature of Society with Th. Hobbes and J.J. Rousseau. The Evolution of Man from the Natural State to the Social State and the Social Contract. Scientific Journal of Humanistic Studies. 4(7) pp. 60-65. Retrieved From: http://web.ebscohost.com.subzero.lib.uoguelph.ca/ehost/. Rousseau, J..J. The Social Contract or Principles of Political Right.
Second Treatise of Government by John Locke and Discourse on the Origin of Inequality by Jean-Jacques Rousseau are books written to try and explain the origin of society. Both try to explain the evils and inequalities of society, and to a certain degree to discuss whether man in his natural state is better than man in society. These political science based theories do not appear, at first, to have anything in common with J. Hector St. John De Crèvecoeur’s Letters from an American Farmer, which are letters written by Crèvecoeur during the settling of America and the beginning of the American Revolution, however with examination we can see reflection of both Locke’s and Rousseau’s ideas about things such as human nature, government, and inequality.
Certain rights for every member of Canadian society were violated against Bradley Harrison by Constable Bertoncello. Section 24(2) in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms outline bringing the administration of j...
Royko’s representation of Richard J. Daley provides his readers an impartial glimpse into the obscure life of a true political power. Daley’s genius in gaining control as mayor of Chicago and then sustaining it from 1955 to 1976 characterizes his tenacity as politician. His explicit understanding of machine politics and use of patronage centralized the power of his administration. On one hand his constituents admire him for his contribution toward urban expansion, influence on the Democratic Party, and patronage of friends and family. On the other hand he is resented for his destruction of homes in the name of progress, corruption of local government, and absolute rule over his city. Royko concludes his colorful story on Richard Daley in quoting Alderman Paddy Bauler in his statement after Daley was first elected in 1995 as saying ” Chicago ain’t ready for reform yet, “(214). Royko completes Bauler’s statement as saying " And in 1970, ready or not, it wasn’t getting any.”(214)!
Rousseau suggests that the first convention must be unanimous, and the minority has no obligation to submit to the choice of the majority, “as the law of majority rule is itself established by convention and presupposes unanimity at least once” (Rousseau, 172). For Locke and Hobbes, one’s self-preservation (and the protection of his property, which is quite synonymous to self-preservation to Locke) is the first principle , and if it is threatened, one has the rights to leave the “body politic” or rebel. Moreover, one also has the right to decide whether he wants to stay under the government when he grows to a certain age . Such arguments give the minority a passive freedom: their voice may not be powerful to change the society, but they can at least leave the society that is against them. Furthermore, Rousseau disapproves factions within a state, especially big ones, as their wills, namely the majority’s wills, potentially nullify the general will . His continual emphasis that the general will should represent the entire people indicates his concern for the
...eing mandated for protection. Rousseau’s conception of liberty is more dynamic. Starting from all humans being free, Rousseau conceives of the transition to civil society as the thorough enslavement of humans, with society acting as a corrupting force on Rousseau’s strong and independent natural man. Subsequently, Rousseau tries to reacquaint the individual with its lost freedom. The trajectory of Rousseau’s freedom is more compelling in that it challenges the static notion of freedom as a fixed concept. It perceives that inadvertently freedom can be transformed from perfectly available to largely unnoticeably deprived, and as something that changes and requires active attention to preserve. In this, Rousseau’s conception of liberty emerges as more compelling and interesting than Locke’s despite the Lockean interpretation dominating contemporary civil society.
While the problems within civil society may differ for these two thinkers it is uncanny how similar their concepts of freedom are, sometimes even working as a logical expansion of one another. Even in their differences they shed light onto new problems and possible solutions, almost working in tandem to create a freer world. Rousseau may not introduce any process to achieve complete freedom but his theorization of the general will laid the groundwork for much of Marx’s work; similarly Marx’s call for revolution not only strengthens his own argument but also Rousseau’s.
From his figurative window, Rousseau sees a Europe ravaged by conflicts resulting from supposedly peaceable and civilized institutions (111). He posits that the essentially problematic flaw, the cause of conflict, is a contradiction in modes of relating: while individuals live within a framework of enforced norms ("l...
Rousseau, Jean-Jacques. “The Social Contract”. Modern Political Thought, Second Edition. Ed. David Wootton. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing, 2008. 427-487.
In his essay, Discourse on the Origin of Inequality, Rousseau attempts to explain the relationship between the formation of political and social institutions and the state of human nature. Before going into depth regarding the state of human nature, Rousseau starts by first demonstrating the first crucial steps in human evolution and the effects these steps had on the development of inequality. Rousseau believes that the combination of these concepts are important to understanding where we came from, who we are now as a society and what our society will resemble in the future.
...ons on what kind of government should prevail within a society in order for it to function properly. Each dismissed the divine right theory and needed to start from a clean slate. The two authors agree that before men came to govern themselves, they all existed in a state of nature, which lacked society and structure. In addition, the two political philosophers developed differing versions of the social contract. In Hobbes’ system, the people did little more than choose who would have absolute rule over them. This is a system that can only be derived from a place where no system exists at all. It is the lesser of two evils. People under this state have no participation in the decision making process, only to obey what is decided. While not perfect, the Rousseau state allows for the people under the state to participate in the decision making process. Rousseau’s idea of government is more of a utopian idea and not really executable in the real world. Neither state, however, describes what a government or sovereign should expect from its citizens or members, but both agree on the notion that certain freedoms must be surrendered in order to improve the way of life for all humankind.
The political philosophy of Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Karl Marx examined the role that the state played and its relationship to its citizen’s participation and access to the political economy during different struggles and tumultuous times. Rousseau was a believer of the concept of social contract with limits established by the good will and community participation of citizens while government receives its powers given to it. Karl Marx believed that power was to be taken by the people through the elimination of the upper class bourgeois’ personal property and capital. While both philosophers created a different approach to establishing the governing principles of their beliefs they do share a similar concept of eliminating ownership of capital and distributions from the government. Studying the different approaches will let us show the similarities of principles that eliminate abuse of power and concentration of wealth by few, and allow access for all. To further evaluate these similarities, we must first understand the primary principles of each of the philosophers’ concepts.
This nullifies any freedoms or rights individuals are said to have because they are subject to the whims and fancy of the state. All three beliefs regarding the nature of man and the purpose of the state are bound to their respective views regarding freedom, because one position perpetuates and demands a conclusion regarding another. Bibliography:.. Works Cited Cress, Donald A. Jean-Jacques Rousseau “The Basic Political Writing”.
Rousseau’s version of the social contract depends on his characteristics of “the state of nature”. Rousseau once said “Man is born
Hobbes, Locke and Rousseau all agree that humans are born equal in the state of nature, and like Locke, Rousseau also believes that the state of nature is a happy one, with optimism towards human nature. He believed that people were only concerned with survival instincts and reproduction, like sleeping, eating, and having sex. Hobbes saw this state of nature as brutal and a constant state of war, while Rousseau argues that it reaches this point when societies develops and population grows, so do people's needs. People start living together in families then small small communities, then they start acquiring properties and the propertyless works for those property owning in...
Rousseau, Jean-Jacques, and Donald A. Cress. "On Democracy." Basic Political Writings. Indianapolis: Hackett Pub., 1987. 179-80. Print.