“Every man has the right to risk his own life in
order to preserve it. Has it ever been said that a man who throws himself out
the window to escape from a fire is guilty of suicide?” Jean-Jacques
Rousseau
By Alex P. Vidal
THE strongest is never strong enough to be always the master, unless he
transforms strength into right, and obedience into duty.
This was the emphasis made by Jean-Jacques Rousseau in The Social
Contract.
Rousseau stressed, “Hence, the right of the strongest, which, though to
all seeming meant ironically, is really laid down as a fundamental principle.
“But are we never to have an explanation of this phrase? Force is a
physical power, and I fail to see what moral effect it can have. To yield to
force is an act of necessity, not of will—at the most, an act of prudence. In
what sense can it be a duty?”
Eighteenth century society found its severest critic in Rousseau, who
spent much of his career in intimate contact with the leaders of the French Enlightenment.
But rather than sharing their ideas, he rejected them, vehemently and
violently, according to John Louis Beatty and Oliver A. Johnson of the Heritage
of Western Civilization.
EVILS
To Rousseau, the major evils of contemporary society were political
absolutism, over-intellectualism, and general artificiality.
“Nor were these evils separable; on the contrary, each fed on the others,”
wrote Beatty and Johnson. “Hence, Rousseau could not agree with reformers who
looked to reason to lead the way to liberty and equality. Society was rotten to
the core, he contended; hence, no solution short of total regeneration could
cure its ills.”
In the Social Contract (1762), Rousseau’s most famous work, he attacked
the problem of political despotism.
Beginning with the provocative charge, “Man is born free; and everywhere
he is in chain,” Rousseau proposes a new social order in which freedom and
equality will be the possession of all.
How such a social order can be achieved in practice is the basic problem
that he tries to solve in the book.
How can we live under a government that, of necessity, exercises
authority over us, and yet remain free men?
The issue, with which Rousseau wrestles so earnestly in The Social
Contract, still remains one of the fundamental political problems facing the
Western world.
In his other works Rousseau attacked with vigor and eloquence almost
every facet of his society.
CONDEMNATION
Perhaps his most sweeping condemnation of the Enlightenment is his early
work, the Discourse on the Arts and Sciences, in which he offered up this
prayer: “Almighty God! Thou who holdest in Thy hand the minds of men, deliver
us from the fatal arts and sciences of our forefathers; give us back ignorance,
innocence, and poverty which alone can make us happy and are precious in Thy sight.”
The opposition between this prayer and the ideals of the Enlightenment is
obvious.
To appreciate the extent of Rousseau’s influence, we have only to realize
that within about 50 years romanticism, a movement of which he was the chief
prophet, was to sweep over Europe.
In the right of the strongest, Rousseau exploded:
“Suppose for a moment that this so-called ‘right’ exists. I maintain that
the sole result is a mass of inexplicable nonsense. For, if force creates
right, the effect changes with the cause: every force that is greater than the
first succeeds to its right.
DISOBEY
“As soon as it is possible to disobey with impunity, disobedience is legitimate;
and, the strongest being always in the right, the only thing that matters is to
act so as to become the strongest.
“But what kind of right is that which perishes where force fails? If we
must obey perforce, there is no need to obey because we ought; and if we are
not forced to obey, we are under no obligation to do so. Clearly, the word ‘right’
adds nothing to force: in this connection, it means absolutely nothing.
“Obey the powers that be. If this means yield to force, it is a good
precept, but superfluous. I can answer for its never being violated. All power
comes from God, I admit; but so does all sickness: does that mean that we are
forbidden to call in the doctors? A brigand surprises me at the edge of a wood:
must I not merely surrender my purse on compulsion; but, even if I could withhold
it, am I in conscience bound to give it up? For certainly the pistol he holds
is also a power.
“Let us then admit that force does not create right, and that we are
obligated to obey only legitimate powers. In that case, my original question recurs.”
No comments:
Post a Comment