Rousseau on Corruption: Its Causes and Elimination

Rousseau on Corruption: Its Causes and Elimination Proprietary Ownership as the Underlying Problem in Human Society According to Rousseau, elements of human societies promote conflict in and of themselves. Specifically, Rousseau explains in his Discourse on Inequality (1754) that the very concept of proprietary ownership, especially of real property (i.e. land ownership), is unnatural and necessarily leads to respective comparisons, competition, and envy.

He argues that those who come to own large amounts of property inevitably become part of a privileged class and that everybody else is relegated to being less privileged and comparatively disadvantaged. Furthermore, in addition to inspiring envy and class conflict within individual societies, the concept of proprietary ownership, according to Rousseau, also explains the antagonism that so frequently leads to conflict and warfare between different societies.

The Origin of Corruption in Human Societies According to Rousseau, there are four fundamental human impulses promoted by proprietary ownership that result in conflict; of those, the fourth impulse leads directly to systemic social corruption of human institutions and to political corruption of governmental bodies in society. Specifically, the first fundamental human impulse associated with property ownership is a natural urge to compete with others that leads to the accumulation of property and material wealth far beyond what any individual actually needs.

The second fundamental human impulse attributable to proprietary ownership is the urge to compare one's self to others instead of valuing property for its inherent or objective worth to the individual. The third fundamental human impulse associated with proprietary ownership is dislike and hatred of others who are perceived as having more.

Finally, the fourth fundamental human impulse attributable to proprietary ownership, and that which is tied most directly to the corruption of human social and governmental institutions is the differential power and the ability to influence those institutions that is typically a byproduct of accumulating material wealth within any society.

Regardless of whether or not Rousseau's theory of the necessary link between proprietary ownership, in principle, and the other three fundamental human impulses is accurate, there is little doubt of the accuracy of the Rousseau's characterization of the fourth human impulse, particularly because it is so evident in contemporary human societies, even within modern democracies (or democratic republics).

Corruption as a Direct Function of Wealth and Power Differential in Society Nothing is more dangerous than the influence of private interests in public affairs, and the abuse of the laws by the government is a less evil than the corruption of the legislator, which is the inevitable sequel to a particular standpoint. In such a case, the State being altered in substance, all reformation becomes impossible & #8230; [The Social Contract.

Book III, Chapter IV: Democracy] Rousseau's characterization of the danger of the influence of private interests on government was accurate in his time and, perhaps, even more so in modern American society. For example, even after the historic Emancipation Proclamation in the Thirteenth Constitutional Amendment that outlawed slavery and the subsequent Fourteenth Amendment that expressly established equal protection under the law as a right of all persons, it took another full century for the descendents of the African slaves to achieve any semblance of equality under the law.

The principal roadblock in that regard was the degree to which private interests (such as the Ku Klux Klan) dominated political, legislative, and judicial institutions well into the 20th century, particularly in the former Confederate states.

Rousseau explained that it is impossible to achieve genuinely just legislative goals when private influences are allowed to draft or enforce laws, and this conclusion proved accurate throughout much of the first century after the Civil War by virtue of the Jim Crow-era laws promulgated by segregationists intent on undermining the constitutional rights of racial minorities.

It is not good for him who makes the laws to execute them, or for the body of the people to turn its attention away from a general standpoint and devote it to particular objects. & #8230; A people that would never misuse governmental powers would never misuse independence; a people that would always govern well would not need to be governed. [The Social Contract.

Book III, Chapter IV: Democracy] The Framers of the United States Constitution recognized the dangers of consolidating legislative power into a single body and sought to ensure against some of its consequences by establishing a system of check and balances to prevent any one branch of government from acting independently, largely because of the risk of undue influence over that branch.

However, even with three independent government branches at the federal level, private influences (especially at the state level) have succeeded in corrupting American government to support the interests and values of the wealthy and powerful, and directly at the expense of all of the members of the less-privileged classes. Toward a Solution Unfortunately, contemporary American politics represents the risks of private influence over legislative.