On ‘The Social Contract’ by Rousseau
Hong Zhang

In class I have discussed this book briefly. My previous discussion is based on how to frame and discuss possible problems like corruption based on Rousseau’s book. In this summary, I will analyze some of the key and interesting points either by this book or by the class discussion.

This book is about political law, government and people. This book gives out bigger view of what a contract really means in different contents. It is one of the most powerful books in human history. Let me try to understand Rousseau's world as follows:

• Legitimacy and Nature Law

Rousseau starts this book by legitimacy. Unfortunately, we have very short life and no human being ever lives long enough to experience the historical changes of the society. Rousseau’s problem is a common problem to people who is born in a ready society with existing classes, governments and cultures. Back into the civilization history, there are too many examples of making power by force. Thus the first point Rousseau argue is that power is not right, unless it transfers obedience into duty, strength into right. Otherwise there is no need for a further discussion of the formation of the society: the strongest wins everything. Rather, Rousseau argues that right comes from social convention. But what types of social convention will prevent the strongest from being the absolute king of all others? Rousseau doesn’t answer this question directly. Instead, in book I the first sentence is:

MAN is born free; and everywhere he is in chains.

My interpretation is that Rousseau uses the Nature law to justify the social convention. To be more specific, Rousseau assumed that men are aware of the fact that freedom is the given property as a birthright, or, he assumes the existence of Nature Law and the awareness of the Nature Law by the