Political science concepts and applications

Social Contract, Rousseau argues that we are all born free and equal, yet do not live either freely or equally. Rousseau then goes on to argue that the construction of the General Will is the means by which people can achieve freedom. The General Will is the social contract where all members of society agree to obey the General Will to be part of society. Rousseau argues that by this General Will, the separate wills of each member of society converge into one. Freedom is achieved because every citizen is equal, each being a single unit of the General Will and having the same amount of influence over it. Rousseau argues that this General Will is the way individuals in society retain their equality and find freedom. Further consideration of the implications of the General Will and the social contract will show that Rousseau's version of freedom and equality may never be truly attained, however this may be a reality of a society, rather than a downfall in the theory.

Rousseau differentiates between two types of freedom, personal freedom and social freedom. Personal freedom is an individual's own selfish choices, where an individual will carry out only those actions that are of benefit to them. Social freedom is the freedom achieved when an individual carries out those actions that the General Will requires. Rousseau argues that social freedom must be achieved at the expense of personal freedom. This is the cost of being part of a society. Thus while an individual is born free, their freedom in society cannot exist until they give up their personal freedom. Giving up their personal freedom for social freedom, means all individuals act in accordance with what is best for society as a whole, not their own needs and wants. It is true in this, that individuals do give up freedom. But the gains from giving up this freedom must also be considered, these gains coming from society as a whole.

The gains of giving up personal freedom relate to the fact that all individuals act in accordance with the General Will. Considering a situation where everyone acts individually shows the problems inherent in this. If everyone acts independently, each person in society has no control over other people, they are subjected to whatever that individual decides. In contrast, the General Will controls individuals and determines behavior. The General Will then, creates a system and a society where certain rules are obeyed. This gain in freedom by having every member of society obey these rules, is worth the cost of the individual's personal freedom.

It must also be noted that living together as a society is a part of life that needs to be controlled. As long as an individual exists as part of a much larger system, there is a necessary cost to maintaining that system. The individual cannot be larger than the system and so cannot have personal freedom greater than social freedom. While this approach seems like each person is less free, this is not really the case, since social freedom is an important form of freedom. The reality is, that for any one person to be free, they must be free from the actions of others. This means that every person has a responsibility to another person's freedom. This responsibility is managed by entering into the social contract, which creates the environment where every person is working within the same sets of rules and regulations.

While Rousseau's argument is generally agreed with, it does pose some practical problems. The major one relates to equality and Rousseau's argument that all individuals are one unit of the General Will and so have equal power over the General Will. The General Will is what society does and does not accept as correct behavior. In modern society, government and the legal system manage this task. However, this is not a situation where all individuals are equal. President Bush has a lot more impact on the General Will than the average citizen. The current Iraqi situation is a good example of this. President Bush is for attacking Iraq and has the power to make this happen. In contrast, the many protesters have the power to protest and voice their opinions, but no real power to force change. This illustrates the power gap existing and how the average person has no real power over the General Will. In society then, the concept of equality is not maintained, with there being a variation in the power each individual has on the General Will. True equality would require that there be no governing body, but that every individual was equally responsible for the decisions of society. This may be a possibility in a small group of people, but in a society as large as the United States, this approach is not feasible. Instead, the democracy exists where the average individual has limited power on the General Will and others have greater power over the General Will. In a world as large and as complex as the United States, this system may be the best form of equality that can be achieved.

Rousseau's argument that the will of individuals converges into one social will is also simplified and does not adequately portray the real situation. The diversity of modern society also has to be considered. Everyone is different in terms of personal characteristics as well as cultural characteristics. This great diversity does not create a situation where individual will converges into one social will. Instead, individual will is forced into one social will, with many individuals rejecting parts of the General Will. This is a conflict situation with a constant battle for the General Will. This conflict is not a bad thing, instead it challenges the General Will and forces it to continue to develop and change. Once in American history, the General Will did not allow black people to vote. With conflict, the General Will changed. This is an example of how the General Will is forced to change and adapt to society's changes. The General Will then, is not something that is stagnant but instead, is constantly being challenged, with these challenges causing it to change and develop. There is never a time where it is expected that the General Will be in a perfect form and be accepted by all. Instead, the individual struggle against the General Will creates a situation where there is always conflict.