The social contract
Jean-Jacques Rousseau argues in book one and book two of the Social Contract that mankind should not ignore the origins of their problems but resolve them by choosing how each and every individual in the universe choose to live. He argues that power never bring any positive change but the choices man wants to make can make everything right. Rousseau states that mankind was born free in this world but in reality, man is in chains (Rousseau 2010). The progress brought up by civilization contributes to the concept of mankind being in chains. His arguments set off the concept of being trapped by civilization through dependence, comparing oneself with others, and the inequalities in the social and economic sectors. In Rousseau’s argument in The Social Contract, he tries to address how mankind can be living together and be free, or resist the force of falling a victim to those who think they are in power. He maintains that living together as free men and women require one to express his or her free will and ensure they are in cohesion with the will of others. This is like a unified agreement, and if there should be someone to govern the society, then there should be an agreement within the society and hence the term ‘social contract’ (Rousseau 2010).
Rousseau states that a sovereign body is formed after free individuals who consider themselves as equal members of the society, agree to create a single body that focuses on the good will and betterment for all mankind. By forming the sovereign body collectively, the society is not expected to bow down to the governing body, but come up with reforms or new ideas to help improve the society as a whole. No one in this world has power to rule over the other (Rousseau 2010). The functions of the society depend on the common interest of the people living in the society. This common will that is expected to create the common good is what formulates the law.
I believe in the notion brought out by Rousseau on sovereignty. Even though mankind was born free into this world, everyone cannot govern themselves, and there has to be an authority figure that can help manage the general wellbeing of the society. The authority figure has to be appointed by the society’s general will. A peaceful society is where everyone agrees with each other, and everyone is treated with respect. This social contract is the same as democracy, where people have to make their choices and not fall as slaves to the authority figure. The views brought out by Rousseau somehow reflects the situation mankind is in, regarding politics and social status. Mankind needs to reclaim what they are entitled to, which is freedom and free will, and come together and agree how they can live together in peace with one leader to govern them. I also do not agree with Grotius, who states that the right to slavery exists where the king is in covenant with the people. Covenant or Agreement should be a two-way thing, and both parties have to benefit. In Grotius notion, the King does not give anything in return and enjoys the hard work put up by the slaves. Rousseau, therefore, urges that no one should surrender their freedom to anyone and the action we take will determine what we will receive. An action done out of free will is a moral action and giving up one’s freedom, is like giving up one’s humanity and morality.
References
Rousseau, J. (2010). The Social Contract. CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform. Seattle, USA.
