Philosophy
In Rousseau’s political thoughts, general will is at the heart of the social contract. General will is the most fundamental principle in Rousseau’s social contract. Social contract gets its legitimacy through only the application of general will. But what this “general will” actually is? To Rousseau general will is not simply the sum total of all individual wills, rather it is the collective will of the people of a community. The general will is something additional to the simply the will of all the individuals. In Rousseau’s view general will is the only source of law and it is the only sovereign. A government derives its legitimacy through “the general will”, a government against the general will cannot be a legitimate one. The foundation of the social contract is general will, and no king, no parliament, no president, but the general will of the whole community is the true sovereign. Rousseau’s general will give rise to the idea of a very important principle of liberal democracy namely, popular sovereignty. The authority to govern, Rousseau claims, can only be legitimized if it is backed by the general will of the people. In a community, only general will should have the power to enact laws and only such laws would be based upon justice and fairness.
Another aim of Rousseau’s social contract is to reconcile the freedom of the individual with the authority of the state. How can an individual remain free while submitting to the authority of a state? After all, the whole concept of a social contract is to give up individual freedom for the sake security. Rousseau’s solution to this dilemma is the idea of general will. A social contract based upon “general will” can save the individual freedom, in addition to providing security. Rousseau would argue that as the general will is the collected will of the community, and by following the general will each individual will be following himself. The individual would not be following a third party, but following his own will. In this way, by obeying the law enacted by the general will an individual would be truly free. In Rousseau’s opinion one can only be free in a society by following the general will. It will not be an unabated freedom like that of the state of nature, but it will be a civil liberty, a moral freedom. Hence, Rousseau made a very provoking claim in Book 1 chapter 7 of The Social Contract, where he says that a citizen who does not obey the general will must be forced to do so. He writes such a citizen must “forced to be free”. (Rousseau)
The next important question for Rousseau to address is how the general is determined. In Rousseau‘s opinion, for general will to be truly general it must come from all and it must apply to all. The notion of universality and generalization is imbedded in the idea of general will. Law enacted by the general will cannot be in the favor of a particular group of people. Social contract can only be legitimate through unanimity of consent. He writes in Social Contract, “There is one sole law that by its nature demands unanimous consent: it is the social pact”. (Rousseau 95) Rousseau’s “general will” will be in the interest of all the people, but, Rousseau realized, such a general will can only be exist in a small community where the interest of the people are not very different from one another and the condition of citizens are very similar. A state where the economic inequalities and cultural diversities are massive the common will of the people cannot arise. So, in practical terms, the general will can truly be manifested in city-state republics.
Rousseau also presents the practical story of the determination of his general will. Individual deliberation of self-interest under right kind of circumstances and proper constraints of generalities and universalities will lead to the general will. In order to determine the general will Rousseau gave the following principle, “the more important and serious the issue, the closer the deciding vote should be to unanimity; the other, that the greater the urgency of the matter, the smaller the majority required should be.” (Rousseau 96) He explained that to determine the general will of all the community will not be practical and feasible at every single occasion. So, he maintained that for simple and procedural matters consent of the simple majority would be sufficient while in case of substantive issues consent of the major portion of the community is essential. Though Rousseau argues that for the original social contract to emerge a complete unanimity of consent is required and no representative body can replace the sovereignty of general will, yet, on some places, he supports representative assembly for as the manifestation of the general will. He writes should the whole nation or community be assembled after every event to discuss the legislation? His answer is a negative one, to him it would be highly impractical and the mere assembly of people cannot guaranty the manifestation of the general will.
However, Rousseau’s account of the idea of general will is not a very vivid and consistent one. There are many controversies and interpretations about what Rousseau meant by the idea of general will. The principal ambiguity is regarding the conflict between the democratic conception of the general will, in which general will is the will expressed by the public through their assemblies, and a transcendent incarnation of the people’s common interest other than what they individually will. In Rousseau’s text support for both interpretations exist.
Finally, he addressed the question of infallibility of general will. He contends that by definition “general will” can never be wrong. General will is the ultimate sovereign and it is always good and inviolable. He opined that when something other than the general will is expressed it does not mean that the general will is wrong, but people are merely expressing the individual will or they are confused about what the general will actually is. Rousseau allowed no exception to the obedience to the general will. To him the general will is inviolable, and if someone disagrees with the general will then he is mistaken. When a person acts contrary to the general will he is acting against his own interest and curbing his own freedom so, in Rousseau’s opinion, such a person should force to be free.
Works Cited
"Jean Jacques Rousseau." 27 Sep 2010. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Web. 1 Nov 2014.
Rousseau, Jean-Jacques. The Social Contract. 1762. Print.
