More handpicked essays just for you.
Rousseau as a criticism of liberal democracy
The relevance of the declaration of independence
Declaration of independence in todays terms
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Throughout the history of the world, people have been constantly fighting for their rights. Whether those rights be as simple as being able to hold your own opinion, or as complicated as being held against your will, even today, our society continues to struggle with the complete and total freedom of man. Of course, our freedoms in the present day are much more developed and superior to those in the past, it is still important to understand exactly how we got to where we are today in order to continue to improve our society as a whole. In 1763, Jean-Jacques Rousseau developed The Social Contract in which it discusses the contract between all members of society and the basic rights humans should oblige by. In the work, he discusses the mutual …show more content…
I do believe that the French took the Declaration of Independence and used it for inspiration for their own. Essentially, the Declaration of Independence is a document that states all of the injustices that are being conducted by the King and it lists the reasons why the people of the New World have decided to operate independently from the English. Many of the injustices the King of Britain was being accused of included quartering large bodies of armed troops among the people, for depriving them, for imposing unnecessary laws, and many more. The French Declaration, much like the American Declaration, was a statement to their political leaders telling them that they, as citizens, should be granted these basic rights and that these rights cannot be obstructed. The Declaration of the Rights of Man goes on the describe these basic liberties that should be granted to all, such as the freedom to communicate ideas, the freedom of religion, and more. Specific examples of similarities between the two include the topic of taxes. The Americans chided the British King for imposing taxes on them without their consent. The French state in Article 14 that all citizens have the right to assess and re-proportion the taxes being imposed on them. The French article describes that the people have the right to fix the taxes being placed on them to better suit their population, so no unnecessary taxes are being distributed amongst the people and without the people’s consent, which is exactly what the Americans wanted. Another example would be in the Declaration of Independence, it argues that the King was holding armies around them for his own personal gain. Article 12 of the French Declaration explains that whereas public military forces are necessary for their security, they should not be placed for personal
The enlightenment ideas affected politics for both the French and the American peoples through the form of government and individual rights. Thinkers such as Jean-Jacques Rousseau, believed in the individual right of man as a citizen of a sovereign nation. In 1789, Marquis de Lafayette used Rousseau and other free thinker’s ideas to draft his Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen to the National Constituent Assembly in France (http://www.pbs.org/marieantoinette/revolution/america_france.html). This established universal rights for individuals that always existed at all times. The document shows many similarities to American documents such as the declaration of Human Rights in the U.S. Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights in the Constitution. For instance, they all show a relationship through the declaration of individual rights such as free speech and freedom of religion. However, the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen focuses more on individualism while American documents focus more on a community “We the People” (http://www.pbs.org/marieantoin...
Declarations of the Rights of Man and Citizen had many similar ideas and influences from the Bill of Rights and enlightenment philosophers. They both provided similar principles about taxation, protection against ex post facto, application of criminal law and each puts forward principles of innocent until proven guilty, freedom of speech, press and religion. The French Enlightenment, also English and American influences appear in the articles. Rousseau's idea on Social Contract addressing declaration one, three and six which deals with the principles of equality, nation and general will. Volitre's "Treaty of Toleration" is an aspect to the document as it affects declaration ten. Declaration ten establishes that, "No one should be disturbed for his opinions, even in religion, provided that their manifestation does not trouble public order as established by law." Montesquieu's "Spirit of Laws" context of separation of powers is taken into account as declaration sixteen affirms that if society doesn't contain a separation o...
The Declaration of Independence was based on certain truths: all men are “created equal” and certain “unalienable Rights”, including “life, liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” , which also was the first and second right of The French Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen. This premise indicated the circumstance of both revolu...
Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence for the American colonists to proclaim freedom from Great Britain's oppressor, King George III. American colonists had been suffering for many years when this important document was drafted. King George III had pushed the colonists into a state of tyranny and most decided it was time to start an independent nation under a different type of government. Jefferson focused his piece toward many audiences. He wanted not only King George III and the British Parliament to know the American's feelings, but also the entire world. The time had come for an immense change amongst the American colonists and Jefferson made sure everyone was aware of it by using his superior strategies of persuasion.
There are many important factors in the Declaration of Independence, which enable the foundation of a new government. These range from describing grievances with England, to how government should be run differently, to the first statement of separation. The first step to the foundation of a new government is the uniting of a people in a common goal. Since all people were feeling violated by English soldiers, it was necessary to state these grievances in order to make people aware that they are not alone. When people learned that others felt the same as them emotion was stirred. The Declaration of Independence listed the grievances such as, “He has erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.” The next important step to the foundation of a new government was to gain peoples ambition by showing how the government would be run if a new party took over. This goal was achieved by stating the rights of man. “We hold these truths to be self evident: That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” This statement made people hopeful and feel kindly toward this new government. The final step in the preparation for a new government was separation from the old government. This was declared twice in the Declaration of Independence. In the beginning, “That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, driving their just powers from the consent of the governed,” and in the end, “that these united colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent states; that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British crown, and that all political connection between them and the state of Great Britain is, and ought to be, totally dissolved. In conclusion, the Declaration of Independence was able to motivate people, give them ambition, and made it simple for Americans to take action.
In the 1700’s Jean- Jacques Rousseau wrote The Social Contract. During this time, the social contract was fairly new theory. It stated in order to have a democracy laws were needed which caused everyone to give up some rights in order to do so. Rousseau makes a convincing solution to the problem of being able to be free while united with everyone else through his philosophy on how the social contract works.
Locke and Rousseau present themselves as two very distinct thinkers. They both use similar terms, but conceptualize them differently to fulfill very different purposes. As such, one ought not be surprised that the two theorists do not understand liberty in the same way. Locke discusses liberty on an individual scale, with personal freedom being guaranteed by laws and institutions created in civil society. By comparison, Rousseau’s conception portrays liberty as an affair of the entire political community, and is best captured by the notion of self-rule. The distinctions, but also the similarities between Locke and Rousseau’s conceptions can be clarified by examining the role of liberty in each theorist’s proposed state of nature and civil society, the concepts with which each theorist associates liberty, and the means of ensuring and safeguarding liberty that each theorist devises.
SparkNotes: Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712–1778): The Social Contract. (n.d.). SparkNotes: Today's Most Popular Study Guides. Retrieved February 9, 2011, from http://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/rousseau/section2.rhtml
While the writings of Karl Marx and Jean-Jacque Rousseau occasionally seem at odds with one another both philosophers needs to be read as an extension of each other to completely understand what human freedom is. The fundamental difference between the two philosophers lies within the way which they determine why humans are not free creatures in modern society but once were. Rousseau draws on the genealogical as well as the societal aspects of human nature that, in its development, has stripped humankind of its intrinsic freedom. Conversely, Marx posits that humankind is doomed to subjugation in modern society due to economic factors (i.e. capitalism) that, in turn, affect human beings in a multitude of other ways that, ultimately, negates freedom. How each philosopher interprets this manifestation of servitude in civil society reveals the intrinsic problems of liberty in civil society. Marx and Rousseau come to a similar conclusion on what is to be done to undo the fetters that society has brought upon humankind but their methods differ when deciding how the shackles should be broken. To understand how these two men’s views vary and fit together it must first be established what they mean by “freedom”.
This Declaration was a groundbreaker in the start of the French Revolution. Many events occurred during the time leading to the formation and issuance of this declaration. During this time of the French Revolution, France was undergoing a recession from the war. There were food shortages and financial crises among the working class along with the nation adding to the revolt of the French people. France was under the rule of the absolute monarchy of the time, King Louis XVI. The National Assembly was formed with the intent to hopefully change the economical system the occurred during the time to stop the occurring crises. The “Declaration of Man and Citizen” and the “United States Declaration of Independence” share many of the basis points including human rights to basic freedoms and liberties as well as the pursuit of a just tax system.
In the Social Contract, Rousseau discusses the idea of forced freedom. “Whoever refuses to obey the general will shall be constrained to do so by the entire body; which means nothing other than that he shall be forced to be free” (Rousseau, SC, Bk 1. Ch. 7). This forced freedom is necessary for a government that is run by the people and not a small group of few to one sovereign(s). For forced freedom allows a difference of opinions but the outcome is the idea with the greatest acceptance. Because political rule requires the consent of the ruled, the citizens of the state are required to take action within their community.
Rousseau, Jean-Jacques. “The Social Contract”. Modern Political Thought, Second Edition. Ed. David Wootton. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing, 2008. 427-487.
In The Social Contract philosophers John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau discuss their differences on human beings’ place of freedom in political societies. Locke’s theory is when human beings enter society we tend to give up our natural freedom, whereas Rousseau believes we gain civil freedom when entering society. Even in modern times we must give up our natural freedom in order to enforce protection from those who are immoral and unjust.
Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and Jean Jacques Rousseau were political philosophers who formulated their own version of the social contract theory. The social contract theory is a treaty or an agreement that developed a set of laws, organized a functional society, and created the need to be governed. It was put into place when man realized that there was no law. Mankind eventually sought the desire for security and order. To receive security and order people shall voluntarily give up all their rights and freedoms and be obedient to some sort of authority. The social contract theory is made up of two agreements known as, “Pactum Unionis” and “Pactum Subjectionis”.
“As soon as any man says of the affairs of the State “What does it matter to me?” the State may be given up for lost,” written by Jean-Jacques Rousseau in The Social Contract reveals the important responsibility a citizen plays in their government (Good Reads 7). History shows the world was once divided into empires where subjects made up the majority of society and over time subjects demanded equality among royalty so the shift towards citizenship occurred. A major step towards citizenship for the subjects was through the feudal system and the traditions of fealty and homage (McKay el al. 393). Then many subjects were led to pursuing a revolution so the people could acquire specific rights they had demanded for decades. When placing citizenship beside the idea of being a subject the contrast reveals that a citizen has