ipl-logo

The Banning Of The Social Contract In France

607 Words3 Pages

The banning of The Social Contract in France seemed quite irrational, especially since Rousseau did not name any particular ruler or member of the court. However, The Social Contract gave permission to the French people to regain their liberty and remove any power, they felt, did not prove legitimacy. Rousseau states that “one (man) thinks himself to be the master of others and still remains a greater slave than they” (Rousseau 1). This implies that even a ruler is not truly free. The ruler is a slave to the happiness of his subjects and will always have some fear of revolt or revolution. The king would not tolerate someone writing about this potential weakness of the ruler of the State. A “master” must find a way to turn citizen obedience into duty (Rousseau 1). The king is unable to do whatever he wants at any given point, because all actions have a consequence whether it is outrage or love. The king believes he rules by divine right; therefore, he would not be pleased if someone thought the king could face serious consequences for his decisions. …show more content…

This would be terrifying to the king, because if the citizens believed he shouldn’t rule, they may take The Social Contract as an excuse to revolt. “Force does not create right” (Rousseau 2) meaning that just because a man is more powerful than you it does not mean he has the right to do anything to harm you. In this sentence alone, Rousseau destroys the idea of the estate system and potentially inspires members of the lower estate to stand up for

Show More
Related
861 Words | 4 Pages

King wisely prefaces his letter by saying, “But since I feel that you are men of genuine good will and that your criticisms are sincerely set forth, I want to try to answer your statements in what I hope will be patient and reasonable terms.” King clearly states his intentions in writing the letter and addresses the audience as an equal, conveying companionship and brotherhood rather than bluntly arguing their thoughts to be incorrect and his reigning superior. In doing this, he makes it more likely for his audience to listen to his thoughts more with an open heart instead of becoming angered by his response, increasing the likelihood of the audience feeling understanding and respecting king as a person and as a leader. A particular section of King’s letter provides ample proof of his qualification to lead a revolution and crush the arguments of those who doubt him and his actions.

Read More
1225 Words | 5 Pages

In any case of failure to protect the rights, the people were in their complete right to overthrow the government (Doc 2 & Pg. 630) In agreement, Rousseau believed that the government’s power also comes from the consent of the people, which he included in his book, The Social Contract. (Pg. 632) Rousseau included much more ideas that incorporated political aspects, but he also his thought about

Read More
987 Words | 4 Pages

The development of the French Revolution mirrors the development of egalitarian freedom over oppressive ideals, only emphasised through changed’ government systems; what began as a fight for equality, soon disfigured to radicalised egalitarianism and oppressive tyranny. Initially, a progressive society based on an obsolete government, the French Revolution epitomises the power of the people and the arbitrariness of revolution, echoed through the changes of governance systems. The impetus of the Revolution - socio-political and economic inequity against the bourgeoisie and proletariat, established the foundations of the revolution, its’ importance accentuated in the source below. The immensity of political unrest in France dominantly influenced

Read More
771 Words | 4 Pages

A King does what he wants no matter who or how many people oppose his

Read More
400 Words | 2 Pages

King values civil disobedience, which is the refusal to obey certain laws or governmental demands by nonviolent techniques as boycotting, picketing, and nonpayment of taxes, but the violence created from that is not his fault. Logic is key in this situation because its obvious you shouldn't punish someone who isn't being violent. Another example is, "We can never forget that everything Hitler did in Germany was “legal” and everything the Hungarian freedom fighters did in Hungary was “illegal.” It was “illegal” to aid and comfort a Jew in Hitler’s Germany. But I am sure that if I had lived in Germany during that time I would have aided and comforted my Jewish brothers even though it was illegal. . . ."

Read More
433 Words | 2 Pages

In The Prince they talked about how a king doesn’t want to be hatred by his people but have them respect him so he can’t be to nice. So a king in this book they should be stingy, cruel, breaking promises, and having a great staff of people. Stingy would be better than being nice to your people shows them that you are the king and they need to respect you and your decision. Cruel is better than being nice also if someone takes sometime from you there has to be something done about it! Morality and ethics are not a big deal to break in The Prince breaking promises so it will benefits the king is okay to do!

Read More
874 Words | 4 Pages

“Oppressed people cannot remain oppressed forever” (4). Eventually, revolution was going to occur, and King is trying to show his readers that this revolution doesn't have to be a bloody one. “I have tried to make clear that it is wrong to use immoral means to attain moral ends” (7).

Read More
877 Words | 4 Pages

The first difference is who should the General Will be determined to. In Rousseau’ opinion, the social contract would not exclude anyone, and would “receive each member as an indivisible part of the whole” (Rousseau 8). However, in contrast to Rousseau’s “whole society,” Sieyes indicated that the Third Estate in France represented everything. The first reason why Sieyes stated so was that the First and the Second Estate were “like ravenous wolves,” who could not think of anything “but subduing and enslaving their neighbors” (Rousseau 107) while the Third Estate was the ones who carried out the work that sustained society (Lualdi 113). The second reason was that the nobles had all kinds of privileges and exemptions, “and even rights that are distinct from the rights of the great body of citizens” (Lualdi 115); therefore, they should be excluded from the common law.

Read More
885 Words | 4 Pages

A prominent point was when he expressed that “We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed”. A law addressing an injustice sometimes does not become justified until it is overdue. Another notable statement from the text is “An unjust law is no law at all”. King questions our corrupt system where breaking some laws is advocated while others require conformity. The statements cited from this document are authentic points for issues of the present and the past.

Read More
650 Words | 3 Pages

(Document 3 source : king Luis XIV of France) he stated that only the head is able to carry out with decisions and that they will decide what is best for the state, by stating that he is saying that he has all the power and he could do what ever he wants to because he is the king and he has the right to. That monarchs would abuse their power and say that they have the right to do so based on the ideology that they have been chosen by god him self, they excessively use their power for their own interests. (Document 5 source : Bishop Jacques Bossuet) states that if the kings have been given power to rule by god himself that they should rear and tremble when they use the power that has been given by god, and especially if that power would be used for

Read More
670 Words | 3 Pages

Ever wonder of having your own kingdom? Think of having all the luxuries of the world, like a big palace, a feast for every meal, a large canopy bed with servants on the edge for your needs. Not only that, but you are the absolute ruler of anyone in our kingdom with no one to stand against you. That is the life you may wish for, but that’s the life of an absolute monarch. An exemplary absolute monarch is Louis XIV because he had a strong defending military, had complete power over the bank for his luxury, and suppressed anyone who went against him.

Read More
927 Words | 4 Pages

The idea that a contract is needed in any society in order to accomplish more and achieve greater individual security for the price of some of their rights and freedoms is prevalent in both Mills’ and Rousseau’s novels. On the contrary, White supremacy is an underlying theme throughout The Social contract, while Mills’ calls out Rousseau for objectifying “peoples of color” by ignoring them from the contract as a whole. Due to this detrimental difference in the two philosophers’ beliefs, I have to side with Charles Mills’ and his racial contract. When it is all said and done, Mills’ appropriately addresses the problem and respectfully finds a solution that is not offensive to certain

Read More
433 Words | 2 Pages

The king here is presented as a megalomaniac. His obsession with power and wealth makes him feel as though he is entitled to everything, which in turn makes him a greedier

Read More
937 Words | 4 Pages

The representatives referred to Rousseau sayings of social contract on how “Man was born free, but walks everywhere with chains” and said this issue will always follow us until we end it. Another example is when Rousseau stated the as people we need to push away our personal life, under the general wills, and focus on property laws that conclude we can not alienate a certain group of people in order to assure goods, and a large growth of wealth. However, this was overlooked because the issue of representation. The south was under populated then the north and requested that slaves be counted in order to fulfil Rousseau idea of involvement of the people in decisions, thus creating the ⅗ compromise which

Read More
810 Words | 4 Pages

A key political theorist influencing the initial outbreak of the French Revolution is Jean-Jacques Rousseau. The Social Contract, written by Rousseau, provided the rights the French people initially demanded. In the Social Contract, Rousseau delegitimizes absolute monarchies and popularizes rights of

Read More

More about The Banning Of The Social Contract In France

Related Topics

Open Document