Jean Jacque Rousseau's Theory and Idea of Ideal Democracy 2.0

You might also like

Download as docx, pdf, or txt
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 3

JURISPRUDENCE : Jean Jacque Rousseau’s theory and idea of ideal

democracy

Jean Jacques Rousseau sometimes seems to be a more radical Democrat. However, Rousseau's
democratic vision is more limited than Locke's. Rousseau, in his most famous political and
philosophical work, The Social Contract (1762), insisted that democracy is incompatible with
representative government, and this view makes it almost irrelevant to nation-states (see state).
He was a supported of the natural law theory and also affirmed that the sovereignty of the people
cannot be alienated or represented. He stated that due to the concept and protection of private
property, humans have animal instincts and believe in a state of peace. It also confirms that the
person has not waived any rights or freedoms. However, he gave up the universal will of society
and gave rise to the belief in the sovereignty of the people. The people believe that the protection
of the will of the people by the monarch is very important.1

For these and other reasons, Rousseau is pessimistic about the prospects for democracy. He
wrote: "Many people rule and few people are ruled. This is against the natural order." "People
should meet indefinitely and focus on public affairs. This is unthinkable." Rousseau also thought.
"No government is more prone to civil war and intestinal turmoil than democracy or people's
government." 2This was the common view of many critics of democracy at that time. "If there are
people of God, their government will be democratic," he argued in a well-quoted statement.
"Such a perfect government is not suitable for men."

Rousseau recognized that unless the people generally believe that popular sovereignty is the only
legal way to organize a country, no people can obtain freedom, but if popular sovereignty is
confused with the government of the people formulated and implemented directly by the people,
then no people can get freedom. . Implement administrative decisions. This article shows that

1
Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Oeuvres complètes, ed. Bernard Gagnebin and Marcel Raymond (5 vols., Paris, 1959-), III,
406; translations are my own.

2
Julia Simon, Singing Democracy: Music and Politics in Jean-Jacques Rousseau ’s Thought, project muse
1
Rousseau intends to actively participate in the dissemination of these ideas in the so-called
ideological movement by adopting rhetorical changes in his governance classification.

Rousseau's work is centred on finding a means to preserve human freedom in a society where
individuals are increasingly reliant on one another for their basic necessities. This issue has two
dimensions: physical and psychological, with the latter being more significant. In the modern
world, humans have developed to gain their own self-awareness based on the opinions of others.
This reality, according to Rousseau, will corrode freedom and jeopardise personal authenticity.
He mainly explored two paths to realise and protect freedom in his mature works: the first is a
political path aimed at establishing a political system that allows free and equal citizens to
coexist in their sovereign communities; the second is the goal of early childhood development
and education projects aimed at cultivating autonomy and avoiding children with the most
abnormal development. Despite his belief that humans may coexist in a relationship of equality
and freedom, Rousseau remains pessimistic about humanity's ability to transcend alienation,
oppression, and unfree dystopia.3

As for Rousseau's description of the relations between sovereign governments, two main
problems have arisen. The first is his political pessimism, which exists even in the best designed
and ideal republic. Like any other group, the government has the collective will, not the personal
will of its members. As the country becomes larger and more fragmented, and citizens become
more physically and emotionally separated, the effective government of the Republic will require
a smaller and more cohesive group of magistrates. Rousseau believes that this organization will
eventually usurp the legal sovereignty of the people and replace the public will of the people
with the corporate will4. The second point to consider is Rousseau's view of the democratic
nature of his republic. Occasionally he paints a picture of the people controlled by the
government elite, because the magistrates leave the task of setting the parliamentary agenda to
themselves. In other cases, it supports a more comprehensive democratic republic. Although
Rousseau disagrees with Hobbes's interpretation of sovereignty as acting on behalf of the subject
or acting on behalf of the subject, he agrees with Hobbes's understanding of sovereignty and its
3
Immanuel Kant, “Critique of Judgment” (New York, 1951).

4
Ibid.

2
relation to individual rights. He opposed the view that people who belong to a political
community have certain natural rights over their bodies and property. On the other hand, the
rights of individuals over themselves, their land and external affairs are subject to sovereign
power and decisions. Rights of Individual must be defined by the sovereign in a way that is
consistent with the combine interests of every single being in a just society. Rousseau objects to
the view that this right can be used as a restriction on the power of the sovereign.

Rousseau's democratic thought adheres to the most basic premise of democracy: the direct
participation of all citizens. Although his concept of democracy cannot be regarded as an
effective critique of what is now considered democracy, Rousseau’s interpretation is wrong,
rather than the fact that it is almost impossible to realize this concept of democracy in todays
society. Although it may be counterintuitive that citizens make rules that they will be forced to
follow in the future, Rousseau claims that all established laws are naturally good because they
will be based on universal will. According to Rousseau, all the laws passed by the parliament are
"just the true acts of the general will", and all the laws passed are fundamentally beneficial
because "the general will is always correct."

You might also like