The Social Contract

Rousseau distinguishes natural liberty (the freedom to do and take whatever you want, whenever you want it) from the civil liberty that is gained entering the social contract. Civil liberty involves obedience to the general will rather than an individual’s particular will. Rousseau believes this form of liberty transcends natural liberty in some ways because it is effectively a “moral liberty.” Individuals subjugate their personal appetites—appetites being a form of slavery in themselves, Rousseau argues—in favor of the common good. 

Democracy is a form of political association in which the government is administered by all or a significant majority of the state’s citizens. This differs from modern definitions of democracy which tend to refer to representative republics, in which citizens elect representatives to pass laws and appoint government administrators. Although he prefers democracies to monarchies, Rousseau is skeptical that they can endure except under very specific circumstances, including a relatively low population and a high level of virtue and equality amongst the citizenry. 

The general will is the collective will of the body politic that aims toward the common good of the whole. To Rousseau, it is the only legitimate source of sovereignty and law. Under his theory of government, the people enter a social contract with the general will, thus preserving liberty in the face of authority. Rousseau believes the general will is indivisible and infallible; for example, while the general public may be misled into voting for something that goes against its well being, the general will continues to exist independent of that folly.

Under Rousseau’s definition of the word, the government is commissioned to execute and administer the laws which are laid out in accordance with the general will. Crucially, the people do not enter into a social contract with the government; the government is merely a middleman between the general will and the public. As such, the government can be disbanded if at any time the people decide it no longer serves the general will, and this can be done without altering or eliminating the original social contract.

Monarchy is a form of political association in which the government of magistrates is answerable to one individual, generally a king of queen. Given the strong temptation toward despotism in this form of government, Rousseau generally views monarchies in an unfavorable light. Monarchies also pose the threat of anarchy, should a weak or incompetent monarch fail to control their lower ministers. That said, Rousseau admits that very large and populous states will struggle to survive outside of a monarchy, where the force and energy of the government is greatest.

Pioneered by English philosophers Thomas Hobbes and John Locke, the social contract is a tacit or explicit agreement in which the people provide their consent to be ruled by an authority figure or figures. While Hobbes believes this contract is most effective when it involves subjects giving up their freedoms to a king in return for civil stability, Rousseau disagrees. In his view, the only legitimate social contract is one between the people and the general will.