Reading Notes on the Theory of Social Contract —— Although Rousseau always modestly thought that the Theory of Social Contract was just a summary of his previous long work that he overreached and then gave up, it was a very short paper. But I think The Social Contract is a great ideological work in modern western history, because Rousseau's book first raised the core issues of modern politics, namely, political authority, legal system and democracy.
The Theory of Social Contract is an old book. 1762, Rousseau's book was banned as soon as it was published and burned in public in Geneva and Paris. Officials and church people also criticized it, and even Voltaire, a great philosopher and writer of a period, was biased against it. However, with the outbreak of democratic political revolution against monarchy in modern European history, people began to realize the status and correctness of this book. Rousseau can be said to be the only political commentator at that time who dared to say that the king was not allowed to master sovereignty. Has anyone commented on Rousseau's theory of social contract in this way? The publication of Social Contract Theory has achieved a major breakthrough in political theory, overthrew the throne of the king and dispelled the ghost of the monarch. The new theory that sovereignty belongs to the people is inspiring and refreshing, which makes the oppressed people wake up and know that they are the masters of the country. ? For such a highly praised book, I can only say that I have read it several times in a summer vacation. I dare not say that I have understood the essence of this book. I can only talk about my superficial views.
Rousseau's book can be said to be written from two aspects, one is democracy and the other is the legal system. Through in-depth demonstration of these two aspects, the core issue of this book is whether there is legal political authority. Having said that, I want to talk about my understanding of the political authority in Rousseau's book. The political authority in Rousseau's books can not be simply understood as political authority, but should be understood as political legitimacy, rationality and legitimacy by extension. Therefore, it is impossible to have political authority in the natural state. According to the theoretical explanation in Rousseau's book, we can draw a conclusion that ideal and legitimate political authority exists. Rousseau quoted the theory of Grotius, another thinker and jurist, on this issue. In his book, he explained how legitimate political authority came into being: political authority was formed in the process of giving up natural freedom in social contract and gaining contractual freedom. In the process of participating in politics, only when everyone gives up all natural freedoms equally and transfers them to the whole collective can the people get equal freedom of contract and the government gain legal political authority.
In the book, we can see that he has many wonderful views on democracy and legal system around the existence of legitimate political authority. First of all, on the issue of democracy, Rousseau mainly analyzes and expounds direct democracy in his book. Let's leave aside the limitations of Rousseau's understanding of indirect democracy. Just from Rousseau's description of direct democracy and Rousseau's admiration for democracy, we can see that Rousseau has advanced understanding and unique views on democracy. The so-called direct democracy refers to the democratic way that citizens manage state and social affairs through direct participation in political activities. It is the initial form of democracy and the most easily recognized democracy. Rousseau described democracy in his book as follows: in the strict sense of the word democracy, true democracy has never existed and will never exist. It is against the natural order that the majority rule and the minority rule. We can't imagine that people will have endless meetings. From this we can easily see that Rousseau's understanding of democracy is very realistic. Rousseau thinks that a complete democracy is impossible. Rousseau's view of democracy is basically consistent with the democracy embodied in Athens' democratic practice. Its advancement lies in the analysis of people's democratic rights, rule of law, power restriction and civic awareness. The limitation lies in the elite democracy in small countries, and the people in big countries lack democratic understanding. Those basic principles or ideas have gradually developed into an indispensable ideological basis for today's democratic construction, especially the contribution of the principle of people's sovereignty to modern democracy is fundamental. Although the representative democracy in reality can basically meet today's social and economic conditions, there are still various shortcomings. Rousseau pointed out in his book that representative democracy can only represent? Public opinion? Isn't it true? General will. The general will is just a collection of many personal wills, which may not be correct, but it is more representative of public opinion, correct and indestructible. If modern representative democracy is a kind of progress to direct democracy, it still inherits Rousseau's basic democratic theory, but changes the realization form of democracy, thus making the democratic operation more practical and making up for the shortcomings of direct democracy in implementation. The positive significance of Rousseau's democratic theory is beyond doubt. As can be seen from Rousseau's book, Rousseau's theory actually represents the perfect expectation of human beings for democracy. He made us realize that the road to perfect democracy is endless. True democracy is extremely difficult to achieve successfully. What we can do is to make continuous efforts on the basis of the theory and practice of our ancestors, hoping that the glory of democracy will eventually cover human society.
If Rousseau's understanding of democracy is still idealistic and has many defects, then Rousseau's legal thought should be more practical and reasonable. Rousseau has a profound understanding of the importance of the rule of law, as the book says? Social customs have brought existence and life to the regime; Legislation has brought the regime the will and ability to act. ? The society under social contract must be a society ruled by law. Only in this way can society have legal political authority, because legal political authority must have many restrictions to ensure the orderly operation of society and the correct expression of public will. Rousseau's understanding of the rule of law began with the establishment of the Constitution. Rousseau thought that the drafters of the Constitution? Outline the national institution, but can't play any role in this institution? This reflects Rousseau's sense of decentralization, that is, the separation of legislative power and judicial power, which is also applicable in modern China. Not only the constitution, but also other laws that regulate people's daily lives. Rousseau was afraid that the abuse of rights would eventually lead to the general will being replaced by power, so his demands on legislators were almost harsh. Rousseau's understanding of power is very incisive. Rousseau explained that power means that the will of the strong is reflected, and whoever is strong has the right. Therefore, under the power, the rights of the weak are not protected. So how can we build a sound society ruled by law? In addition to the idea of decentralization, we can also see Rousseau's division of ideal law in Chapter 12 of Volume II of the book. Rousseau divided the law into those that planned the whole order? Politics and law? That is, the constitution that stipulates various freedoms and rights of citizens? Civil law? Punish all laws? Criminal law? , and engraved in the hearts of citizens? Fashion, customization? Rousseau called it the fourth law? The real constitution of a country? Say it? Get new strength every day; When other laws are aging or disappearing, it can revive those laws or replace them, it can maintain the creative spirit of a nation, and it can unconsciously replace authority with the power of habit. According to the current theory, this fourth law can be regarded as customary law and one of the sources of modern law. In fact, at first I didn't quite understand why Rousseau respected the fourth law so much. After careful consideration, I realized that Rousseau valued the national culture of the fourth law, which is the most distinctive thing of every nation.
The Theory of Social Contract is really a difficult book to read. In order to prove the existence of legitimate political authority, he discussed political theory through the analysis of nobility, slavery and democracy, and discussed the existing forms of legitimate political authority in different fields through the analysis of war, government, law and public will. Limited by my own knowledge, I consulted a lot of materials when reading this book, and found that many scholars also put forward different views on Rousseau's views in the book, and pointed out many limitations in Rousseau's thought. Through the understanding of their articles, I feel that my understanding of social contract theory has deepened, and I also understand that no thinker's theory can be completely correct. We should dare to question the authoritative theory in reading and look at the problem with dialectical eyes. When absorbing the thoughts of great thinkers, we should distinguish what is enlightenment and what is the limitation of thought on the basis of in-depth analysis. Every book is a world, and it is the author's mapping of the real world in which he lives. These worlds are beautiful or simple, but when you understand the author, you must be full of emotion. That kind of emotion is the voice of the soul and unparalleled charm. When I read Rousseau's On Social Contract, I was very moved.
Rousseau, a man with romantic nature and outstanding talent, was the most unique and far-reaching enlightenment thinker in France in the18th century. He dares to reveal his soul, which is a symbol of sincerity. For him, nature is truth, and truth is above everything else. And his unique personality thought made his later fate. His book On Social Contract is a good testimony.
The theory of social contract was warmly praised during the French Revolution, and many revolutionaries regarded it as a treasure house of life. ? People are born free, but they are everywhere in chains. ? At the beginning of this book, Rousseau declared the eternal pursuit of freedom and equality to the world. This is a book that advocates freedom of contract and determines the will of the public. The central argument of the book On Social Contract is that people are born free and equal, and the state can only be the product of free agreements between free people. The sovereignty and legislative power of the country lies with the people, and the government is only the executor of the law. What if the government is inconsistent with the people? Public will? The people have the right to overthrow it.
Freedom is the product of human nature. The first concern of human nature is self-care. Everyone has the freedom to choose his own suitable lifestyle. There is no doubt that people are born free and equal. In addition, people can only give up their freedom if they consider their own interests. When a person loses his freedom under the shackles, it is not that he loses his innate freedom, but because of the strong interference from the outside world. In short, people are born free, and freedom is the product of human nature.
However, there are advantages and disadvantages in the world. The only way for human beings to survive is to get together and form a consortium, and exert all the strength of * * * to protect the personal and property of each member. Once this combination is achieved, the isomers of * * * are produced. People achieve this combination by signing contracts. It is worth noting that when people conclude a contract, they are not only free to join, but also should not take their own assignment as a clause. In the same body, everyone naturally has rights and belongs to freedom.
Sovereignty is made up of people who participate in the same institution. It represents the public interests of all members, and there is no way to harm the interests of the same body, otherwise it will violate the social convention. Of course, all members have the obligation to obey the public interest, so that social conventions are legal. Sovereignty is an inalienable and inalienable right, because it represents the general will of the people, not the individual will, and it is neither transferable nor indivisible. Sovereignty is a right formed by the same subject, which is based on social contract. The monarch has the right to bind every member, but his power is limited. It can't go beyond the boundaries stipulated in the social contract, and it can't excessively demand and constrain its members. Only in this way can the fairness of the exercise of sovereign power be guaranteed, and the interests gained by members in participating in social contracts can be guaranteed.
What is the law? This is well expounded in the theory of social contract. The law is the rule that the general will arises. The law is universally binding on the members of the country, its object is universal, and the will it represents is universal, not the simple addition of individual wills. To stabilize the country and the people, it is necessary to formulate relevant laws and guide the society to move in the direction of justice.
To the government. The government is only the executor of the monarch and the executor of the law. The establishment of government is based on the existence of sovereignty. The government is the same institution, representing the will of the monarch to carry out state affairs. It is an intermediate link between the people and the monarch, and its function is to realize the mutual adaptation between the people and the monarch, enforce the law and safeguard social and political freedom. From a high perspective, with the expansion of the country, the more power the people give to the government, the greater the possibility of the government being tempted, and the more ways to abuse power. Therefore, the people should strengthen their restraint on the government. Of course, different countries have different government systems, but the only thing that is the same is that the government is only the executor of sovereignty.
The book On Social Contract contains a lot of contents, so I can't list them all. Here I just list a few impressive aspects to talk about my feelings. In a word: people are born free and equal; The government is only the executor of the law, and the people have the right to overthrow it.
On the Theory of Social Contract: Reading Notes III On the Theory of Social Contract is1a great French thinker during the Renaissance in the 8th century. Jacques? Rousseau's masterpiece.
/kloc-Europe in the 0/8th century, after a long and dark feudal autocracy, with the progress of technology and the emergence of new modes of production and new social strata, a new social trend of thought gradually emerged. They tried to establish a new social form that was reasonable, legal, in line with human morality and guaranteed people's rights on the old social system. Among them, The Theory of Social Contract published by 1762 has a great influence on history. In the French Revolution, it was regarded as a revolution by most revolutionary leaders? The bible? It became the theoretical program of the bourgeois revolution in France and the United States in the18th century. Sovereignty lies with the people? His political ideas have always influenced various political systems in modern society. During the National People's Congress this year, Xinhua News Agency's Xinhuanet Reading Channel also included it? Recommended bibliography by representatives of the two associations? One.
Rousseau's theory of social contract has two theoretical premises: people are born free and social order is sacred. The characteristic of his theory is to oppose violence, whether it is the government or the individual. The problem to be solved is: combine what rights allow with what private interests expect, so that justice and utility are no longer separated? . In Rousseau's view, giving up freedom means giving up human nature and giving up the rights and obligations of being a human being? . But in Rousseau's thought, the individual is obviously not supreme. Born free? Does theory produce extreme thoughts? Anyone can consider himself the master of others. This kind of social violence leads to the loss of personal freedom, which is not the society Rousseau wants. Therefore, Rousseau thinks? Social order is a sacred right and the basis of all other rights? . Rousseau opposed violence to change the social system, he thought? Violence does not bring rights, we only have the obligation to respect the legal force? . Since social order is so important that violence cannot bring rights, how can we create an authority to manage society? Rousseau thinks,? It is precisely because no one has the natural power over others, and precisely because violence cannot produce rights, so any reasonable authority of human society should be based on the agreement between people? . Individual human beings form an authority through social contract, that is, the government, and give part of their necessary rights, property and freedom to this authority for its management of society, and the ultimate goal of this authority formed through social contract is to ensure the survival of all parties to the contract. This is the most idealized social model of democratic politics described by Rousseau, and this social model may exist because the interests of human beings have formed a close social bond. Only on the basis of this * * * rule the society with interests? . Here, Rousseau removed the two popular elements of the regime at that time-violence and theocracy-on the basis of forming a government, and the European governments at that time became illegal in theory.
Rousseau believes that the society under social contract must be a society ruled by law. ? Social customs have brought existence and life to the regime; Legislation has brought the regime the will and ability to act? The formation of a contract must have a series of mandatory social norms to regulate the behavior of the contracting parties in order to protect the public interests of the contracting parties, safeguard people's freedom and equality, and enable the contract to be implemented. Rousseau believes that people must abide by the law, which is a responsibility and an obligation. He thinks? Essentially, individuals who perform these duties serve themselves as well as others? . But the legal constraints are not unlimited. Everyone has complete control over the property and freedom left to him by the general agreement? , this may be modern? What is not prohibited by law is legal? Philosophical exposition of his thought. Because the law gives the government the compulsory power to manage the people, Rousseau put forward a series of decentralized political system designs in order to prevent the government from violating the people's wishes, abusing its power and exceeding its authority. His series of harsh descriptions of the drafters of the constitution show his serious concern about the abuse of power by the government and his thoughts on the separation of legislative, executive and law enforcement powers. Rousseau thought that the drafters of the Constitution? Outline the national institution, but can't play any role in this institution? ,? Because those who rule the people cannot make laws, and conversely, those who make laws cannot rule the people; Otherwise, his laws will be controlled by his personal feelings, he will always maintain his injustice, and he will never be able to prevent his law-making work from being polluted by his personal purposes? . Not only the drafting of the constitution, but also the formulation of daily laws. Rousseau thinks,? Law is the norm of citizens' organizations, and the person connected with the law should be the maker of the law? ,? People who sketch grass-roots laws cannot and should not have legislative power? ,? Legislative power must and can only belong to the people? The government is only the agent of social interests and power. Rousseau's description of government officials, and modern? Public servant theory? Quite consistent, he said. The master of administrative power is not the master of the people, but the employee of the people; The people can appoint or dismiss them at any appropriate time; They were asked to obey rather than reach a contract. ? In Rousseau's view, government officials are not even parties to the social contract, and naturally do not have the qualification and power to legislate.
Generally speaking, Rousseau's political thought belongs to the category of democratic politics. However, Rousseau's consideration of real politics is obviously not a Democrat. Due to the limitation of technical level at that time, Rousseau did not think that there was a real democratic society. He even thinks that a big country is suitable for the monarchy, which is related to Machiavelli. Willie's The Prince has the same idea. He believes that a truly democratic government can only be achieved in a small country with a small population. What about other situations? Democratic government or mass government is more prone to civil war and unrest than other forms? . Rousseau was troubled by two problems, one was technical and the other was education. In his view, the legislative decisions of a democratic government can only be made through the citizens' assembly, which is often impossible under the technical conditions at that time. In addition, Rousseau believes that virtue is the foundation of * * * and the country, but? Not everyone's decision is mature. Of course, we all do it for our own interests, but we can't guarantee that we will see this interest forever. The people will not be corrupt, but she will be cheated. At this time, she always seems to go to bed when she sees something bad? . In fact, the two problems that troubled Rousseau are also the basic problems of democratic politics in modern society. One is to have enough technical level to ensure that the people's will can be fully reflected in the will of the country, and the other is that the people must have the concept of democratic politics and meet the moral standards of democratic politics, which is a social education problem. It is because of the people's moral standards that Rousseau created one? Constitution drafter? Give him the same field as God. He described the drafters of the Constitution as follows: Finding social norms suitable for a nation requires superhuman wisdom. Such wisdom should be able to observe human emotions without being involved; It should be completely independent of human nature but can fully understand its essence; Its happiness should have nothing to do with us but be willing to think of us; Finally, it must go to the distant future to find its own glory and work hard in this world, thinking that this is the result of future generations? . ? Anyone who bravely undertakes the mission of organizing the nation must have the ability to transform human nature; He wants to transform an independent and complete individual into a part of a larger whole, from which the individual obtains his own life and existence in a certain sense; He wants to deconstruct human composition to improve and enhance human strength; He wants to replace the natural material existence with partial moral existence. ?
Does Rousseau advocate aristocratic democracy in reality or? Elite democracy? In his view, apart from the advantages of the separation of powers, it also has the advantages of the election of members, who can only get positions through elections, thus making the qualities of integrity, openness and experience, which are loved and respected by the public, the guarantee of a wise government? ; ? Moreover, the assembly is easy to handle, the official business is easy to discuss, and it is handled in an orderly way. The prestige abroad is maintained by respected elders rather than unknown or despised people? . ? In a word, if we can be sure that elite rule is for the national interests rather than our own interests, then elite rule over the masses is the best and most natural arrangement? . Rousseau spent a lot of time in the last volume of On Social Contract to analyze the rise and fall of Rome and the country, which shows that he attached great importance to this system.