Liberalism vs. Democracy: Locke and Rousseau’s Social Contracts
The Birth of Liberalism: John Locke (1632-1704)
The Political Role of Ownership in Building Consensus and Democracy
John Locke, the empiricist philosopher known for his assertion, “there is nothing in the intellect that has not previously been in the senses,” also likened a child’s mind to “wax, forming and shaping as you want, a blank slate.” He believed that the human mind at birth is like a blank paper, devoid of any innate ideas, including the concept of God. According to Locke, knowledge stems from simple ideas derived from sensory experiences, while complex ideas are merely combinations and mergers of these simple ideas.
This idea of progress starkly contrasted with the prevailing Christian worldview. Locke’s emphasis on individualism aimed to emancipate individuals from societal constraints and obligations. He believed in the individual’s right to interpret the universe according to their own understanding, a notion that undoubtedly contributed to the Reformation.
Locke’s work laid the groundwork for the bourgeois doctrine of his time: liberalism. His writings represent the foundation and principles of liberal democracy, with its emphasis on individual rights. These principles, considered natural, inalienable, and novel, would later be enshrined in declarations of human rights as modern states emerged from the bourgeoisie’s triumph and seizure of political power.
Locke’s political philosophy diverges from Thomas Hobbes’s in its interpretation of human nature. Locke viewed humans as inherently good and cooperative, not inherently quarrelsome and selfish. While order and political stability were paramount in his thought, he didn’t share Hobbes’s fear of anarchy, believing in an underlying stability within the social order.
Religion held significance in Locke’s thinking. However, as a Protestant shaped by the Renaissance and Medieval periods, he favored rationality and simplification in dogma. He advocated for tolerance in religious dissent, rejecting the notion of humans as inherently sinful and vicious. Instead, he held an optimistic and worldly view of human nature.
Locke opposed the Hobbesian idea of a state where civil and religious power were intertwined. Despite his advocacy for religious tolerance, he believed the state should intervene to prohibit doctrines that threatened public peace.
Democracy “Radical”: Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778)
The Restoration of the Community: Rousseau and the Critique of Liberal Ideology, Its Implications for Socialist Thought
Rousseau’s thought can be categorized into three major themes:
Criticize and Condemn Civilization
Rousseau critiques the idea of civilization’s progress in his two discourses. In Discourse on the Sciences and Arts (1750), he argues that progress does not alleviate the human condition but instead brings increased depravity and corruption.
In Discourse on the Origin and Foundations of Inequality of Men (1755), Rousseau posits that humans are naturally equal. However, as societies develop and become civilized, natural inequalities are replaced by artificial and politically imposed ones. These inequalities become increasingly extreme as laws are crafted by the wealthy to serve their interests. Progress and civilization, therefore, become processes that exacerbate inequality between the rich and poor, the powerful and weak, masters and slaves.
Rousseau contrasts reason with emotion, emphasizing the importance of morality over science. Faced with an unequal and coercive France, he argued for a social order aligned with natural laws, which he believed the existing social organization violated. His theoretical framework centered on the relationship between society and the individual, emphasizing the inherent goodness of humans corrupted by a society that contradicted natural laws.
According to Rousseau, a society built on social inequalities, like the France of his time, was antithetical to human nature, irrational, and opposed to freedom. This idea is encapsulated in his famous phrase, ‘man is born free and everywhere he is in chains’.
Proposal Defense of Freedom and Equality
Rousseau’s defense of inalienable freedom and equality is expressed in his theory of popular sovereignty, as outlined in The Social Contract.
In The Social Contract (1762), Rousseau outlines the conditions for a political solution that would enable the necessary societal reforms. He argues that the purpose of a political society is to defend and protect the person and property of each member. Individuals surrender their natural rights in exchange for civil rights, becoming citizens. These rights, like the contract itself, cannot be established by force but must be grounded in free consensus.
Citizens possess both individual and collective wills. The general will, representing the common good, takes precedence over individual interests. Because the general will supports both the individual and the common good, individuals remain as free as they were before entering the social contract. Opposing the general will is therefore deemed contrary to the common good, and those who reject the contract are “forced to be free”—an unfortunate phrase that has sparked accusations of totalitarianism against Rousseau.
Search Vital
In his Discourses, Rousseau advocates for a return to a more natural state, free from the moral decay he observed in civilization. He envisions a “civil religion” devoid of dogma, based on simple truths, and rejecting intolerance, to shape true citizens.
Rousseau’s triadic conception can be summarized as follows:
