Rousseau

            How does Rousseau conceive the relationship between democracy and freedom? What are the main merits of and problems with his approach?.
             Although the Social Contract promises freedom to the members of the state this freedom does not automatically include democracy. Democracy is suggested as a possible form of government alongside aristocracy and monarchy whereas today it is arguable that democracy is seen as the only form which denotes a free people. Freedom could well be defined as "having a say in political decision making" but Rousseau's idea of freedom is from one's own natural desires so it is possible to be a good citizen and lead a more fulfilling life. Rousseau does not believe that man naturally knows what is best for him "the public must be taught to recognise what it desires". He goes further to state that there is right way for society to be run and that this is the "general will", the right course of action which the public would chose to take if they considered what was best for the whole rather than just themselves. Rousseau admits however that to find the general will is not always easy and his critics deny that it even exists. It is also important to consider exactly how much say Rousseau does allow the people as part of the Social Contract and whether it is fair to call the book a licence for tyranny. It is possible to see why democracy is not essential to Rousseau's definition of freedom however it is ultimately questionable whether life in a state formed on the Social Contract would indeed be free.
             The Social Contract is explained by Rousseau as an exchange of a man's natural freedom for civil freedom. The natural freedom man is born with is physical freedom, we are free to do whatever pleases us. This is exchanged in the Social Pact for civil freedom. This civil freedom guarantees the safety of person and property from other men but Rousseau is less interested in these aspects of so called negative freedom.