1.0 Introduction
In understanding to what extent Rousseau social contracts had contributed to the understanding of democratic values, we must know what exactly democracy values mean. There are a few democracy values. First, liberty and Equality. Second, Citizen as Sovereign. Thirdly, Citizen Determine Government.
The main concept of the social contracts according to Rousseau, is that people was actually in the state of nature, in which the freedom they have was not the true freedom they wanted to be. In the state of nature, the strongest was the most dominant, and it will enslave the weaker person. In such a case, human being was in enslavement. People by then were not happy. A true freedom only exist in civil society, in which people was free to do anything, and own anything they had work on without being fear of being robbed by others people. This will be possible only, when a person was bided together in a convention[2], in which all members of the society had agreed upon, this was known as the social contracts. Only then people are truly free and happy.
2.0 Liberty and Equality
Rousseau had always noted the significantly on individual liberty. This was his main concept in the social contracts, in which later was also one of the important values in democracy system[3]. This was supported by Cohen(2001)
“Freedom, the French challenge us, is actually within, obtained from finding out true identity, not from having satisfied social conventions and stereotypes. It requires having the opportunity to live the kind of life we want to live”(pg95)
According to Rousseau[4] (as noted by Gourevitch 1997) “Man is born free, and everywhere he is in chains.”(pg41). Rousseau, believe that man was actually free in nature, that he is the master of himself. Slavery was completely unacceptable in the social contracts because, the relationship between the master and slave never grant any form of happiness for the slave, even though the slave had given all his freedom to the master[5]. Hence for Rousseau, slavery was nothing but useless. As noted by Rousseau (as noted by Gourevitch 1997)
“Now, a man who becomes the slave of another does not give himself; he sells himself, at the least for his subsistence: but for what does a people sell itself? A king is so far from furnishing his subjects with their subsistence that he gets his own only from them; and, according to Rabelais, kings do not live on nothing. Do subjects then give their persons on condition that the king takes their goods also? I fail to see what they have left to preserve….the right of slavery is null and void, not only as being illegitimate, but also because it is absurd and meaningless.”(pg45-48)
Rousseau suggests that in order to provide real freedom to the people, a convention or constitution should be established. This had become one of the main core values of the democracy[6] that is protecting the rights of the people with the constitution. The social contract noted by Rosseau was the same function with the constitution we are having today in democracy system.
Rousseau idea of freedom distinct with the freedom that human being attained during the state of nature. By letting go the freedom in which human being attained in the state of nature, where people are greed and selfish. Human being will gained another form of freedom, that is the civil freedom and the rights of to attain property[7]. In which in was noted by Rousseau (as noted by Gourevitch 1997). “What man loses by the social contract is his natural liberty and an unlimited right to everything he tries to get and succeeds in getting; what he gains is civil liberty and the property of all he possesses.”(pg53-54). This was also worship by contemporary democracy of civil liberty. Rousseau, also pay emphasis on the moral liberty, which consists of two elements. First, it amounts to free will. in here, Rousseau is describing about the ability of human being to resists temptation and beckoning of desires. Second element is concern about the sources of laws which procure freedom. The law that “force us to be free” is law that was made by ourselves for our own that is liberty. This was noted by Knowles[8](2001)
“the second aspect of moral concerns the source of the laws which procure freedome. They cannot be the imposition of a wise and paternal authority. The laws which guide and coerce us along the paths of virtue, forcing us to be free, are laws of our own making.”(pg304)
So what is the true spirit of the social contracts or the contemporary constitution in democracy values? The social contracts main aim is to create a social bond that binds the individual of the society together that will create a force that will ensure the benefit of their own by the same time guaranteeing the particular individual interest. By doing this, only that individual rights and properties will be respected by others people, and remain free as before during the state of nature[9]. This was explain by Rousseau (as noted by Gourevitch 1997) “The problem is to find a form of association which will defend and protect with the whole common force the person and goods of each associate, and in which each, while uniting himself with all, may still obey himself alone, and remain as free as before.”(pg49-50).
Equality is another important value that Rousseau had introduced to the democratic system[10]. Without the existent of equality, liberty will never be able to stand. As stated by Rousseau (as noted by Gourevitch 1997)
“if one inquiries into precisely what the greatest good of all consists in, which ought to be the end of every system of legislation, one will find that it comes down to these two principal objects, freedom and equality. Freedom because any individual dependence is that much force taken away from the State; equality, because freedom cannot subsist without it.”(pg78)
Citizen has the equal rights whether in terms of political right and also economic rights. Citizen was all perceive as equal footing in the perception of law. Equality is one of the main principle of Rousseau principle[11]. As stated by Rousseau (as noted by Gourevitch 1997)
“Which prove that the equality of right and the notion of justice which it produces follows from each one’s preference for himself and hence from the nature of man….from whatever side one traces one’s way back to the principle, one always reaches the same conclusion: namely, that the social pact establishes among the Citizens an equality such that all commit themselves under the same conditions and must all enjoy the same rights.”(pg62-63)
3.0 Citizen as Sovereign
Another value of democracy is that citizen of the state was the main master of their own faith. Democracy system was to create a government by the people, and for the people.
By understanding one of the main concepts of Rousseau, man is born free and everywhere he is in chains. Under the social contracts, the rights and duties of the citizen was stated clearly and well defined, in which the convention was made by nobody but the citizen themselves[12]. This was noted by Rousseau (as noted by Gourevitch 1997) “The people, being subject to the laws, ought to be their author: the conditions of the society ought to be regulated solely by those who come together to form it.”(pg68) Since the citizen was only bind by the law that only made by them, the citizen was thus free. The combination of the citizen together will form a Republic or also known as body politics, in other words the Sovereign[13]. As noted by Rousseau (as noted by Gourevitch 1997)
“This public person, so formed by the union of all other persons formerly took the name of city, and now takes that of Republic or body politic; it is called by its members State when passive. Sovereign when active, and Power when compared with others like itself. Those who are associated in it take collectively the name of people, and severally are called citizens, as sharing in the sovereign power, and subjects, as being under the laws of the State.”(pg51)
According to Rousseau, Sovereign which was form by the people, and is representing the general will. Sovereign thus could not be transferred surrender the general will to another party or person[14]. This was stated by Rousseau (as noted by Gourevitch 1997).
“I say, then, that sovereignty, since it is nothing but the exercise of the general will, can never be alienated, and that the sovereign, which is nothing but a collective being, can only be represented by itself; power can well be transferred, but not will.”(pg57).
Beside from that, sovereign can only represent by the general will, and it does not only express the will of some part of it. Rousseau had given the example of declaration of war, and domestic administration. Both of this is not the expression of the sovereign, it is merely an act of particular group of people[15]. This was stated by Rousseau (as noted by Gourevitch 1997).
“This error comes from not having framed precise notions of sovereign authority, and form having taken what was mere emanations from this authority for parts of this authority itself. Thus, for example, the act of declaring war and that of making peace have been regarded as acts of sovereignty, which they are not; for neither of these acts is a law but only an application of the law, a particular act which decides a case, as will clearly be seen once the idea that attaches to the word law[16] has been fixed.”(pg58)
In Rousseau social contracts, people that are part of the sovereign make their decision according to votes. Member of the Sovereign will only votes based on the general interest or the general will, which will benefit the states as a whole. People that form the sovereign were expected to vote against their private interest. In a healthy state, votes will mostly be unanimous, because all people are voting according to the general interest. If a person that voted against the general will does not meant the person is going against the general will, that he was simple making a mistake[17]. As noted by Rousseau (as noted by Gourevitch 1997).
“Yet the question is raised how a man can be both free and forced to conform to wills which are not his own. How are the opponenets both free and subject to laws to which they have not consented? .... I answer that the question is badly framed. The citizen consents to all the laws, even to those that punish him when he dares to violate any one of them. The constant will of all the members of the State is the general will; it is through it that they are citizens and free. When a law is proposed in the people’s assembly, what they are being asked is not exactly whether they approve the proposal or reject it, but whether it does or does not conform to the general will, which is theirs; everyone states his opinion about this by casting his ballot, and the tally of the votes yields the declaration of the general will. therefore when the opinion contrary to my own prevails, it proves nothing more than that I made a mistake and that what I took to be the general will was not.” (pg124)
The matter on how the vote will be counted and perceived as majority was actually quite similar with today democracy system. In contemporary democracy particularly in Malaysia. Party that could become the government is the party that gain simple majority, in the general election. Beside that, in order to amend the constitution of Malaysia, it is a must to acquire a two third majority from the lower house parliament. This is only an example. Rousseau noted that there is a need to have something close to unanimity in order to pass in matter that was in great important. In matter of unimportant administrative, only a simple majority will be done for[18]. As noted by Rousseau (as noted by Gourevitch 1997).
“two general maxims can help to regulate these ratio: one, that the more important and serious the deliberations are, the more nearly unanimous should be the opinion that prevails; the other, that the more rapidly the business at hand has to be resolved, the narrower should be the prescribed difference in weighting opinions; in deliberations which have to be concluded straightaway a majority of one should suffice.”(pg125)
4.0 Citizen Determine Government
One of the important values in contemporary democracy is the rights to vote for the government. This was clearly stated in the social contracts. Citizen that acts as sovereign will choose their government in periodical assemblies in other words, that was similar to contemporary voting days. When the people gather together in an assembly, the government ceased to exist, because the citizens which form the sovereign no longer need a government to represent themselves. This was quite similar with today dissolve of parliament before the general election. During this period of time citizen of the state will assemble and discuss whether the previous government should continue[19]. As noted by Rousseau (as noted by Gourevitch 1997)
“The instant the people is legitimately assembled as a sovereign body, the jurisdiction of the government wholly lapses, the executive power is suspended, and the person of the meanest citizen is as sacred and inviolable as that of the first magistrate; for in the presence of the person represented, representatives no longer exist.”(pg112)
Sovereign could institute a government in which this is an act of law, but the appointment of magistrate in the government was not the power of the sovereign. The appointment of magistrate in the government was actually a particular act by the government. The sovereign change into the democracy, and temporarily act as the executive. In which people are now magistrate and they will name certain magistrate to be members of the government. As soon as the sovereign had set up a government, the sovereign ceased to become a government. And both the sovereign and executive had become two distinct political bodies[20]. As noted by Rousseau (as noted by Gourevitch 1997)
“Here again is revealed one of those astonishing properties of the body politic by which it reconciles apparently contradictory operations. For this reconciliation is accomplished by a sudden conversion of Sovereign into democracy; so that without any perceptible change, and simply by a new relation of all to all, the Citizens having become Magistrates pass from general to particular acts, and from the law to its execution.”(pg117-118)
It was important to note what a government is meant in Rousseau social contracts. According to Rousseau, a government is not part of the contracts, it is only a law or decree that the government must be instituted in order to execute the general will of the sovereign. It is not a ruler, but civil servant for the citizen[21]. As noted by Rousseau (as noted by Gourevitch 1997). “Thus those who hold that the act, by which a people puts itself under a prince, is not a contract, are certainly right. It is simply and solely a commission, an employment, in which the rulers, mere officials of the Sovereign.”(pg83).
Representation was bad according to Rousseau, it was seemingly as surrendering your civil rights of deciding on laws to another group of person that may in turn selfishly making the decision on your behalf wrongly for their own purpose. This was supported by Knowles[22](2001)
“Representation may often be necessary, but that necessity very quickly becomes occasion of collective bad faith. To make a judgement on the issue which I raised at the start of this discussion: I can think of plenty of reasons that may be offered for having free votes by representatives rather than referenda involving all voters. All of them are working against the core values of democracy.”(pg317)
4.1 The Separation of Power
Another value that was emphasis in the Rousseau social contracts is the notion of check and balance between the executive and legislative. This was important, in order to prevent misuse of power by the government that cause them to usurp the sovereign. Beside from that, in order to prevent the government from gaining an upper hand on the sovereign, a periodical assembly of the sovereign that form the legislative should be established in order to check the power of the executive[23]. As noted by Rousseau (as noted by Gourevitch 1997).
“We have seen that the legislative power belongs to the people, and can belong only to it. It is easy to see that, on the contrary, by the principles established above, the executive power cannot belong to the generality [of the people] in its Legislative or Sovereignty capacity; for this power consists solely in particular acts which are not within the province of law, now, consequently, within that of the Sovereign, since all of the Sovereign’s acts can only be laws.” (Pg82).
5.0 Conclusion
Jean Jacques Rousseau was noted as the father of modern democracy. In answering the question of “Why is Jean Jacques Rousseau’s ‘social contracts’ important in terms of understanding democratic values?”. It is important, because the Rousseau social contract introduce the distinct concept of what meant by ruled by the people. It introduce the core values of liberty and equality into the social contracts that later become rights of the people. People in the social contracts are free to own things, free to live, free to speak up. The social contract had free human being from enslaving themselves, bringing them more freedom. People in the democracy system are now master to nobody but themselves, enacting their own law that bind nobody but themselves. Choosing their own leader among their own, to rule themselves.
The most significant importance of the social contract is to introduce a political system rule by the people by the people.
Reference:
Cohen. M. (2001). Political Philosophy: From Plato to Mao. London: Pluto Press
Gourevitch. V. (1997). Rousseau The Social Contract and other later political writings: Of The Social Contracts OR the Principles of Political Rights. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Knowles. D(2001). Political Philosophy. London: Routledge
The 'Lectric Law Library's Lexicon website. (n.d.). Retrieved 20th Septermber 2008. from http://www.lectlaw.com/def/c290.htm.
.
Bibliography
Baechler. J. (1995). Democracy An analytical Survey. Le Kremlin-Bicetre: United nations Educational.
Constitution org website. (1994). Rolan. J. The Social Contract and Constitutional Republics. Retrieved 20th Septermber 2008. from http://www.constitution.org/soclcont.htm
Maskin. E & Partha Dasgupta. (1999). Democracy Value: Democracy and other goods. Ian. S & Casiano. H.C. (Eds). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Overseas Young Chinese Forum website. (2000). Bo Li. Equality and Democracy. . Retrieved 20th Septermber 2008. from http://www.oycf.org/perspectives/4_022900/equality_and_democracy.htm
Pearson. K.A. (1991). Nietzsche Contra Rousseau: A Study of Nietzsche’s moral and political thought. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Rousseau. J.J (1994). THE SOCIAL CONTRACT OR PRINCIPLES OF POLITICAL RIGHT. (G.D.H Cole, Trans). Retrieved 20th Septermber 2008. from http://www.constitution.org/jjr/socon.htm (Original work published 1762).
Sparknotes website. (n.d.). Retrieved 20th Septermber 2008. from http://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/socialcontract/section2.rhtml
The University of Adelaide website. (2005). The Social Contract by Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Retrieved 20th Septermber 2008. from http://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/r/rousseau/jean_jacques/r864s/
The 'Lectric Law Library's Lexicon website. (n.d.). Retrieved 20th Septermber 2008. from http://www.lectlaw.com/def/c290.htm.
Young. I.M. (1999). Democracy Value: State, civil society, and social justice. Ian. S & Casiano. H.C. (Eds). New York: Cambridge University Press.
[1] Gourevitch. V. (1997). Rousseau The Social Contract and other later political writings: Of The Social Contracts OR the Principles of Political Rights. New York: Cambridge University Press. Jean Jacques Rousseau was born in the 28th June 1712 in Geneva. He had never received any form of formal education. He never had a fixed job and travel all over Europe. He had several famous works, the first work is the First Discourse (Discours sur les sciences et les arts) that was published in January 1751 and won the prize from the Academy of Dijon. Second Discourse (Discours sur l’origine et les fondements de’inegalite parmi les homes) completed in May 1754. the Discourse is published in May 1755. in November the Political economy appears in volume v of Diderot and d’Alembert’s Encyclopedia. In 1762 15 May the Du contrat social and in 22 May 1762 Emile was published and both of the work was banned in both France and also Geneva. Rousseau even write the constitution for both Corsica and also Poland.
[2] The 'Lectric Law Library's Lexicon website. (n.d.). Retrieved 20th Septermber 2008. from http://www.lectlaw.com/def/c290.htm. convention was actually similar with constitution. Constitution was actually defined as The fundamental law of the state, that state the principle on how government is founded and regulating the divisions of power between the legislative, judicial and executive. The constitution also note the rights and duties of its citizen living within it.
[3] Cohen. M. (2001). Political Philosophy: From Plato to Mao. London: Pluto Press
[4] Gourevitch. V. (1997). Rousseau The Social Contract and other later political writings: Of The Social Contracts OR the Principles of Political Rights. New York: Cambridge University Press. pg 41.
[5] Ibid. pg45-48
[6] Ibid. according to Rousseau when all the magistrate is larger than its citizen. A successful democracy would need to be small, with simple and honest citizens who have little ambition or greed. Because it is so unstable, democracy is also very susceptible to civil strife.
[7] Ibid pg53-54
[8] Knowles. D(2001). Political Philosophy. London: Routledge.pg 304
[9] Gourevitch. V. (1997). Rousseau The Social Contract and other later political writings: Of The Social Contracts OR the Principles of Political Rights. New York: Cambridge University Press. pg49-50
[10] Ibid. pg 78
[11] Ibid. pg62-63
[12] Ibid. pg68
[13] Ibid. pg51
[14] Ibid. pg57
[15] Ibid. pg58
[16] Ibid. law in the social contract was actually en mass. That means, it was general in nature and never a particular person or action. The law could be used to give certain part of the society privileges but never in any particularity. It may set up several classes of citizens, and even lay down the qualifications for membership of these classes, but it cannot nominate such and such persons as belonging to them.
[17] Ibid. pg124
[18] Ibid. 125
[19] Ibid. 112
[20] Ibid. pg117-118
[21] Ibid. pg83
[22] Knowles. D(2001). Political Philosophy. London: Routledge. Pg 317
[23] Gourevitch. V. (1997). Rousseau The Social Contract and other later political writings: Of The Social Contracts OR the Principles of Political Rights. New York: Cambridge University Press. pg82
No comments:
Post a Comment