Themes
Key
LitCharts assigns a color and icon to each theme in The Social Contract, which you can use to track the themes throughout the work.
Human Freedom and Society
Sovereignty, Citizenship, and Direct Democracy
Government and the Separation of Powers
National Longevity and Moral Virtue
Summary
Analysis
Rousseau argues that only Gods could give people the laws that are best for them without being persuaded by the same “passions” that lead them to stray. It is therefore very rare to find competent lawgivers who are capable of “transform[ing] each individual […] into a part of a much greater whole.” These “founder[s] of nations” have to break down people’s independence in order to give them the “moral and communal existence” of society—so the weaker people are and the more they stand to gain from society, the better society is likely to be. The lawgiver is “special and superior” to the sovereign and the government, and must not be involved in legislation or the execution of laws, which must also be separate from one another. This is why many early city-states had foreigners make their laws.
Rousseau’s concept of the “lawgiver” is essentially the same as what contemporary people call a “founder.” Basically, people do not simply make a social contract and form a state with strangers, based on blind trust. Rather, they need to actually organize themselves into a community before they make that community political. The lawgiver’s job is to help people learn to understand themselves as a community, so that they can eventually turn their community into a nation by making a collective agreement (or social contract). But if the founder sets up the nation and is “special and superior” to it, why would this person be barred from serving in the sovereign or the government? Rousseau makes it clear that, while the founder organizes the people and helps them form a collective identity, the people themselves create the social contract, which creates the state and gives it legitimacy. Therefore, the founder is not involved in the process of actually governing: they only bring people together so that the people may govern. The founder is “special and superior” in the sense that their role is about making a state possible in the first place, but not in the sense that they have any “superior” power over the state itself. After all, if founders take too prominent a role in the state itself, they can create conflicts of interest or raise suspicion among the people. That said, throughout history, founders have quite often transitioned into heads of state, which again highlights that Rousseau’s model is theoretical rather than historical.
Themes
In fact, the lawgiver has both “a task which is beyond human powers and a non-existent authority for its execution.” And they must also speak to the people in terms they can understand, for it takes good government to create “the social spirit” that makes people understand, appreciate, and perpetuate good government. This is why lawgivers have “appeal[ed] to divine intervention” throughout history to justify why people should join and follow the nation. These difficulties require lawgivers to have a “great soul,” which is “the true miracle” that allows them to create lasting nations. (Although this does not mean that “religion and politics have the same purpose,” only that politics often uses religion.)
Rousseau draws an explicit parallel between the lawgiver (or founder) and the religious leader not because he sees government and religion as the same, but because both of their positions require persuading people to gather around a common identity and set of beliefs. This reflects the underlying importance of culture and tradition to a nation: while the social contract is what gives a state its legitimacy, it is not what truly animates a people.In other words, it is form, not content: it says how people have to cooperate, but not what they have to cooperate on. Rather, “the social spirit” and the people’s civic and moral values define what people actually choose to do in practice.
Themes
