Rousseau’s Thoughts on Inequality

Jean-Jacques Rousseau was a French political theorist and

philosopher. He is regarded to be very influential because of his
impact on the leaders of the French Revolution and the Age of
Enlightenment. One of his most notable works is his theory
surrounding inequality, as put forth in his book Discourse on Inequality.
This book is a criticism of the modern world and provides insights into
how society could have evolved.

The Two Types of Inequalities

Rousseau mentioned the existence of 2 types of inequalities - Natural
and Moral. The former refers to inequalities arising from one’s health
conditions, age, or physical features. On the other hand, moral
inequality is the one that is established by man. Of these 2 social
inequalities, natural inequalities are genetic and cannot be prevented
while moral inequalities are unnatural and can be prevented.
To put forth his ideas surrounding inequality, Rousseau made use of a
thought experiment, the state of nature. As a result, the thoughts that
he propounded are not historically accurate. The experiment is a
theoretical fiction that aims to understand the origin of modern man, as
he is now.

The Natural Man and the Man of Civilization

According to Rousseau, there is the natural man who essentially is
strong and is more orderly, when compared to the animals in his
vicinity. He is deprived of moral sense and is unaware of what is good
or evil. He lives to fulfill his needs, namely - food, sex, and rest - which
he can satisfy easily. He is naive and is happy with all that he has while
the civilized man is full of selfishness. The natural man is characterized
by pity and empathy. Also, he cannot tolerate pain and hunger. As a
result, he has no reason to not be wild. In comparison, the natural man
is stronger than the man of civilization and the former can easily defeat
the latter in a fight. The natural man is also not aware of what all he can
extract from nature and is just involved in gratifying his desires.
Rousseau said that the natural man is extremely similar to an animal,
barring the fact that he can improve his life. He is defined by two major
characteristics - pity and self-preservation. Pity keeps him closer to
others and self-preservation pushes him towards being alone. Though
contrasting, these two features keep his life balanced and there is
almost no inequality among all the natural men. On the other hand, the
instinct to make his life better pushes the man away from his natural
state, towards a selfish and immoral life.
Over time, the man had to overcome difficulties posed by nature as well
as other living species, he had to devise methods to make life easier.
For example, he had to eat fish to escape shortages of food caused by
famines or prolonged winters. He also had to kill animals for flesh as
well as to use their skin as clothing. These occurrences that repeated
themselves, made man familiar with them. He began perceiving them
differently and this difference that man witnessed, set him apart from
all other animals - making him superior.
Rousseau also suggested that languages evolved - with man
developing complex ideas. Cries, gestures, and a few imitative sounds
were all that composed language for centuries. Languages evolved
since there is more meaning to what man wishes to convey and it
requires specialization. Hence, today, we have many languages spoken
across the world. Also, due to the evolution of languages, man is able
to develop his reasoning.

The Concept of Property

The institution of property got established after the beginning of
agriculture. Man realized that he could not possess his produce unless
he managed to own the land he was cultivating. Eventually, men began
claiming that since the harvest belonged to him, so did the land. There
would have been no inequalities arising from this had everyone been
equally skilled, which was not the case. The most hard-working
received more returns and became rich.
Rousseau wrote, “The first person who, having enclosed a plot of land,
took it into his head to say, ‘This is mine,’ and found people simple
enough to believe him, was the true founder of civil society. What
crimes, wars, murders, what miseries and horrors would the human
race have been spared, had someone pulled up the stakes or filled in
the ditch and cried out to his fellowmen, ‘Do not listen to this imposter.’”
He also adds, the most appropriate thing to do in such a circumstance
was to transform the degrading society into a purely democratic one,
which has the power to ‘force people to be free’ and ensure there are
no inequalities.
With the concept of property theft coming into place, inequalities
among people rose. This also brought into the picture the issue of
poverty - since not everyone could possess the limited property. Moral
inequality was then introduced, due to the fact that anyone could own
property, irrespective of their physical characteristics. Due to the
invention of societies and property, the labor necessary was divided
amongst the different individuals who owned land. This division of
labor and the concept of property allowed property owners to dominate
and exploit the poor. This led to conflicts amongst the rich and the poor
- which could not otherwise have happened had man not left the state
of nature.

The Roots of Inequality

Rousseau did not suggest a denunciation of property in itself - instead,
he was critical of the differences that the institution of property created.
Humankind has to witness the divide between the rich and the poor (or
the haves and the have nots) where the rich believe that the poor are
subservient to them. They know how pleasurable it would be to
command the poor and try acquiring new slaves through the existing
ones. There is a conflict between the two and the solution is the
formation of political societies by the poor, through which they can
ensure their interests remain protected. As a result of this, there is a
social contract between the rich and the poor, as has been put forth by
Rousseau.
But, there is a catch here - the rich recognize the fact that the poor seek
war against them to end the unfair domination. As a result, the rich
deceive the poor into joining political societies that grant them the
equality they demand. However, these societies sanctify the
oppression of the poor by the rich, thus legitimizing it and making it an
inherent feature of the civil society which shall become permanent.
Rousseau rejected the Enlightenment belief in the human progress of
reason through science and technology. The advent of technology,
according to Rousseau, further increased inequality by playing a major
role in molding human psychology. Agriculture and technology, which
we see as boons, were extremely instrumental in drawing the line of
gender roles. Brotherhood and cooperation among men led to the
perception that women are inferior to men. This further suggested men
a new way to discriminate against a particular section of society. At this
point, relationships became more about benefits and not pity. The
authority of the rich and the thefts committed by the poor was driven
by necessity (or greed) and were both devoid of compassion and
justice. This constant tussle between the rich and the poor never ended
but there was immense bloodshed, owing to the many wars fought. The
differences between men developed over time, due to the
circumstances they were in, and this only became permanent in the
long run. While civilization multiplied man’s wants, his inability to
satisfy them made him unhappy - it only brought to light human
decadence measured in terms of human unhappiness.
Over time, it became necessary for men to also possess other qualities
such as wit, beauty, talents, and strength among many others. As time
passed, despite the rich having everything they needed, they required
the services of the poor. On the other hand, the poor needed help from
the rich. Even a middle path couldn’t enable them to live independently.
There was a never-ending conflict between the rich and the poor and
among individuals to pursue their own interests, coupled with the secret
desire to betray each other. Jealousy, insatiable wants, the intention to
cause harm to one another, and the false display of kindness affected
property and more importantly, contributed towards the growing
inequalities.
He was essentially an advocate of approximate social equality and not
total equality. He rejected the idea that social inequalities reflected
natural inequalities of talents. For instance, a rich man would not be
called rich if he is rich in talents (the word rich here, is a reflection of
only his wealth) and a person who is said to be poor is essentially not
poor in talents (here, poor only refers to the wealth he possesses). So,
when a man talks about social equality, he refers to equality of
opportunity, which cannot be provided in capitalist or communist
societies.

Conclusion
Rousseau, in brief, propounded that inequality comes from property, but
the increase in inequality is caused by the development of the human
spirit. Further, he said that vanity among human beings and differences
in property led to inequality - the rich became richer and the poor
became poorer. Laws were enacted to protect rights and civil society
eventually degenerated into extreme enslavement, inequality and
ambition. The natural man loses his ferocity to live in society as his
desires grip him and he loses his independence. He understood that no
one could be free without a majority believing in popular sovereignty as
the only legitimate way of organizing the state. He played a major role
in spreading these ideas that we take for granted today.