Marx Vs Rousseau Social Contract

Improved Essays
The social contract, which is agreed upon by the majority of the citizens is based on the general will of the people, that aims for the common good of each individual in the state. It aims at structuring the state, so that people can live in a civilized society as well as pleasing each individual. However it also intends to create rules and laws, which construct a safe and secure environment for the citizens of the said state. Thus it is based on laws rather than power. Being a part of this contract one has to give up ‘the physical freedom’ that is to do any thing one pleases to do, yet one gains the ‘civil freedom’ of acting rationally and morally. By agreeing to the social contract citizens agree to a civil society that is build upon laws …show more content…
In order for the social contract to succeed and for people to live happily together, laws are created and shall be obeyed and respected by the citizens as well as by the government and rulers. Laws are what the citizens desire the most in a state; ultimately they are recorded as what the citizens hope the state shall provide them. Rousseau believes that those rules and laws are the soul of the state. The beauty of rules is that people would obey them yet lose …show more content…
“[T]he severity of penalties is only a vain resource, invented by little minds to substitute terror for that respect which they have no means of obtaining” . Thus, according to Rousseau the government should make the laws match the general will of the people additionally instead of using punishment and terror the government should try to prevent it in the first place and “establish the reign of virtue” , which will contribute to the prevention of crimes in the state. The term “morality” has a huge importance within the limits of the state and especially the civil state that is conducted upon the social contract. In order to reach mortality citizens need to become virtuous and come together for the common good and the general will of the state. When Citizens understand the significance of laws to their common good, they will start to respect them and act accordingly to their duties. Rousseau further on claims that in order for the social contract to be successful, citizens must love their duties. It’s not enough to be virtuous but it’s very important to love and respect our duty toward the state. “But when citizens love their

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    The Social Contract was Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s way to explain his views on how a political community should be settled. In the contract Rousseau writes “man is born free, but he is everywhere in chains” (Social Contract). By writing this Rousseau shows his view that the government takes away citizen’s rights and restricts them. Furthermore Rousseau believed…

    • 497 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    Rousseau places a great deal of importance on the common good and therefore somewhat rejects personal freedoms. He believes that in order to be a part of the Social Contract, in which he believes man is free, personal freedom must be ignored. In the state of nature, man is free to indulge in their personal needs and freedoms and therefore must be disregarded in order to unsure the common good. If an individual disagrees with the majority, they are inherently wrong and should be forced to obey the general will. Rousseau states, “whoever refuses to obey the general will will be forced to do so by the entire community” (Rousseau, 150). In other words, if an individual rejects or contradicts the ideas expressed by the community, the community should be able to force that individual to submit to their opinions. It is at this point in which Rousseau and Mill differ. This act of forcing conformity would be seen as a form of tyranny to Mill who values the freedom of the individual. In order for society to progress, individual freedoms must always be expressed foremost. Indeed, Mill agrees that man should not behave in ways that would harm others but they should still be free to do as they wish. He states, “In all such cases there should be personal freedom, legal and social, to do the action and stand the consequences” (Mill, 64). But, in defining freedom, as expressed earlier,…

    • 1838 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Superior Essays

    In Rousseau’s document The Social Contract, he refers to an original “social contract” that terminates the “state of nature” and establishes the “civil state”. For example, in entering the social contract, the individual surrenders his rights to society as a whole, which governs in accordance with the general will: “Each of us puts his person and all his power in common under the supreme direction of the general will…” (Pg. 72). Therefore, in Rousseau's explanation of freedom, there is a division between two types of freedom. They are personal freedom and social freedom. Personal freedom comes from humans' basic instincts and natural selfishness. An individual acts only if he benefits. Rousseau also called this freedom a “state of nature”. The second freedom, social freedom, is achieved when an individual obeys the desires of the “General Will”. According to Rousseau, all people are born free, but the natural freedom is not achieved until these people enter into a social contract. It is at this next point where Locke and Rousseau…

    • 1217 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Superior Essays

    In order to leave the state of nature individuals must consent to the social contract in order to form a commonwealth. For a social contract to be enacted all members of society must agree to give up certain rights provided in the state of nature to create a civil society that benefits them all. The commonwealth for all three signifies an impartial power which makes the final decisions concerning matters in civil society. For Hobbes the social contract is created because people live in fear that another will harm them in their quest for self-preservation. While Locke believes that a social contract is needed to create an impartial judge because men cannot be trusted not to take justice too far, once the common good is no longer at the forefront. Rousseau believes that a social contract is needed in order to preserve the community as it is becoming hard for everyone to survive on their resources…

    • 2006 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In short, Rousseau stresses that general will is the supreme good and just for all. In such state, people are incapable of making mistakes and would not violate any laws. “each of us put his person and all his power in common under the supreme direction of the general will, and in our corporate capacity we receive each member as an indivisible part of the whole”(p.392).…

    • 328 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The social contracts stems from individuals coming together to form a sort of agreement to, which is central in making a society. Not only form a society but to make it a better place. Law, State and the constitution are all by-products of society; here we see the stepping-stone from people being people, to it becoming sovereign.…

    • 896 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Rousseau is a social contract theorist who believes men in a state of nature are free and equal. In a state of nature, men are “Noble Savages.” His social contract theory states that humans are corrupted by society, all people must enter a social contract that requires people to recognize a collective “good will” which represents the common good or public interest. All citizens should participate and should be committed to the good of all, even if it is not in their personal best…

    • 908 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The Social Contract Theory is an agreement between the people and the government that the people will obey the government as long as the government serves in a capacity that protects the rights of the people and furthers the good for the general will. Before we consent, we exist in the state of nature. In the state of nature, we follow natural law. Natural law comes from God. Natural law gives us our natural rights, which we are promised because of our personhood. Natural rights are rights that we are born having, such as the right to live.…

    • 1264 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Rousseau’s Social Contract (1762) presents a view of society as corrupting, by describing the ways in which the transition from living freely, to living enslaved by the rules of society decays the virtue of man. Before there was civilisation, people lived peaceful and innocent lives, in which they strove to sustain their own contentment and absolute freedom. In the ‘state of nature’, man was free to do as he wished,…

    • 2119 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great Essays

    Rousseau observes human nature as innately good when it’s extracted from all social attachments and the immensely corrupting overall influence of society itself. Society, for Rousseau in his eyes is a grand impulse where the decencies of human beings are displayed. Rousseau 's political theories are derived from the seemingly simple idea of arranging humans into a social setting that’s bare of corrupting elements of society. Rousseau 's leap toward a social and political order of amour propre over amour de soi is evidence of this. Rousseau derives a substantial amount of his beliefs from morals such as equality. “Equality disappeared, property was introduced (Rousseau 9)”. Rousseau genuinely possessed empathy for the health, happiness, and labor of “good men” while Machiavelli did…

    • 1209 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Great Essays

    The people understood that they are the power and centerpiece holding everything together. He also truly enjoyed how the people would come together as a whole to discuss the issues face to face that were happening on all levels from the government to the people. Hobbes was quite the opposite of this however which led Rousseau to maintain such a firm stance with him as well as Grotius. Rousseau’s legacy is based mainly on two concepts found in his work with the idea of the Social Contract Theory. However, the purpose of Rousseau 's philosophy and his approved government is essentially the idea that if all problems are met with the unity of the people and dealt with accordingly using his Social Contract Theory. The Social Contract Theory was a moral and political perspective that each individuals has obligations to own up to within their society. This meant that those obligations could mean anything from meeting up to resolve issues with other members of the society to how much a power a state could actually have over any one particular individual. It also that identified the proper course of action for a variety of different scenarios as well as governing rules and what are essentially…

    • 1840 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    For Rousseau human nature is simple, innocent and pious and he based this notion on the premise of the “state of nature” where humans were free and equal, and just seek to satisfy their basic needs (Rousseau 1974, p.80). What is more, Rousseau claims that society, as a whole should be the one, which guided by its general will, set up the laws (Rousseau 1974, p.96). Nevertheless, Rousseau's principles are not longer workable within the present society due to the fact that we do not longer live in a state of nature; rather in a corrupted and unequal system. For this reason is determinant to consider the premise that Human beings are bad, ungrateful, and fickle or as the Italian politician Machiavelli asserted, “men are wicked and they never do good unless necessity drives them to do it “ (Viroli 1998, p.47). Similarly, since it is technically impossible to set up rules for a society, which is unequal, the best position that we can opt is to submit and rely on a ruler (prince) who ensures the common good (Viroli…

    • 662 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    The idea of freedom in Jean Jacque Rousseau’s The Social Contract (1762) is present throughout the book and Rousseau’s own, personal understanding of freedom underpins his argument for his ideal state. In this essay I will argue that individual citizens aren’t truly free in every sense in Rousseau’s state as the sovereign has complete dominion over public matters and due to the sovereign explicitly being composed of every citizen, this could lead to nearly every problem being deemed within the public realm. Furthermore, one cannot be individually free, in my opinion, when one cannot voice dissent against the prevailing convention of society, as is the case in Rousseau’s state. To argue this thesis effectively I will explore what freedom means…

    • 2188 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Hobbes’ account of government by social contract is based on the basic principle and rational that people give up some of their rights in order to feel secure. According…

    • 1070 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    His books were a blue print on how Rousseau wanted to know the reasons of why the people gave up their natural liberty over the state of nature. How the political standpoint became such an impact in people’s lives. One of the things he did state in his book that stuck out to me was that, “Man is born free, and everywhere he is in chains.” My thoughts on what he meant by this quote was that the people were basically slaves to their own community and obeying every law in which was presented to them. He then goes onto about how the natural society is the family. Meaning the men of the family especially the father’s. The women and children belong to him personally, because…

    • 900 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays