My rating:

add to my books

read book

The Social Contract

by Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Maurice William Cranston (Translator)

3.62 · rating details · 4,250 ratings · 126 reviews

‘Man was born free, and he is everywhere in chains’

These are the famous opening words of a treatise that has not ceased to stir vigorous debate since its first publication in 1762. Rejecting the view that anyone has a natural right to wield authority over others, Rousseau argues instead for a pact, or ‘social contract’, that should exist between all the citizen...more

Mass Market Paperbound, Penguin Classic, 192 pages

Published June 27th 1974 by Penguin Books (first published 1762)

more details... edit details

Get a copy:

There is a good chance some of your friends read this book. Sign in to see!

Friend Reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

Lists with This Book

Candide and Philosophical Letters by Voltaire

The Social Contract by Jean-Jacques Rousseau

The Enlightenment and its Impact

3rd out of 178 books — 38 voters

Works of Geoffrey Chaucer. The Canterbury Tales/Troilus and Cri... by Geoffrey Chaucer

St. John's College Reading List (Freshmen to Juniors)

56th out of 100 books — 7 voters

More lists with this book...

Community Reviews

(showing 1-30 of 7,970)

filter | sort: default (?) | rating details

Dec 28, 2011

Lona rated it

· review of another edition

بالنظر للفترة الزمنية التي نُشر فيها الكتاب يتبيَّن للقارئ مدى شجاعة جان جاك روسو لجرأة المحتوى الذي لا يتناسب أبداً مع الحالة السياسية في تلك الفترة وفعلا منذ أن نشر روسو الكتاب لم يعيش مطمئناً، فقد ظلَّ ملاحقاً في كل مكان يقصده إلى أن رحل عن هذه الدنيا. وبعد 30 عاماً من وفاته سُميَّ هذا الكتاب "بإنجيل الثورة الفرنسية"، لأنها قامت على المبادئ التي يحويها الكتاب
تناول الكتاب بالشرح ضرورة أن يحكم الشعب نفسه ويحافظ علي حقوقه من خلال حكومة منتخبة تكون وسيط بين الشعب والسيد ولكن أس...more

like 4 likes

· see review

Oct 06, 2010

Austin Ratner rated it

Shelves: nonfiction, philosophy

In Lincoln-Douglas-style debates in high school, Locke and Rousseau used to be paired off against each other; Locke would be called in against some proposition meant to protect the public good, but deemed by the 'negative' side incompatible with vital individual liberties; and Rousseau would be called upon by the 'affirmative' side in support of the common good, even if such support came at the partial expense of "private interests." "Eminent domain," where the government ca...more

like 4 likes

· see review

Jul 16, 2007

Jeff rated it

Shelves: philosophy, must-reads, politics

"The average man of each new generation has said to himself more clearly and consciously than his predecessor: 'My neighbor is not my enemy, but my friend, and I am his, if we would but mutually recognize the fact. We help each other to a better, fuller, happier living; and this service might be greatly increased if we would cease to restrict, hamper, and oppress each other. Why can we not agree to let each live his own life, neither of us transgressing the limit that separates our individu...more

like 3 likes

· see review

Jan 08, 2009

Tyler rated it

· review of another edition

Recommended to Tyler by: Anyone Interested in Political Theory

Shelves: philosophy

In this book, Rousseau takes on the profoundest problems of man's political structures. His ruminations over what makes for the best political system reminds me of Plato's Republic. I like his impatience for politics; in an ideal political arrangement, he would tolerate little of that nonsense.

What I didn't care for is the short, aphoristic chapters whose ideas aren't fleshed out enough for my preference. I don't like this approach in general, which is why I've read so little Nietzs...more

· see review

Nov 24, 2011

Ensiform rated it

· review of another edition

Shelves: non-fiction, french

Translated and with an intro by Lester Crocker. I don’t know what to make of this. There’s a lot in here that’s factually wrong (such as Rousseau’s view of the progression of governmental systems through history) or contrary to common sense. And there are views that did not foresee modern communication abilities (types of government are dictated by country size, so, he argues, democracy cannot work in a large state). But many of the ideas are intriguing: the General Will, which is always rig...more

· see review

Jul 22, 2011

David Sarkies rated it

· review of another edition

Shelves: philosophy

"Man is born free, and everywhere he is in chains"". This is how Rousseau, an 18th Century philosopher, opens his treatise on good government. The writing is not so much about a good form of government, but rather how government should run to be the best for the people. Of some of the ideas he proposes is that the law giver and the sovereign are two different people, therefore to have the ability to make and execute the laws in the same hands is repugnant. In fact, though he does ...more

· see review

Feb 21, 2011

Delilah rated it

· review of another edition

I read The Social Contract and Rights of Man one after the other.

As a fierce supporter of the books, not downloads, I will first review the aesthetics of these two books. Both works are quite light considering the heavy content. I bought these first hand, so the covers are smooth, and the pages firm and crisp. I enjoy Wordsworth Classics beige pages, which I find very easy on the eyes, compared to the reflective, stark whites of the computer I look at for 8 hours a day (plus bloggin...moreI read The Social Contract and Rights of Man one after the other.

As a fierce supporter of the books, not downloads, I will first review the aesthetics of these two books. Both works are quite light considering the heavy content. I bought these first hand, so the covers are smooth, and the pages firm and crisp. I enjoy Wordsworth Classics beige pages, which I find very easy on the eyes, compared to the reflective, stark whites of the computer I look at for 8 hours a day (plus blogging time). I enjoy the picture on Rights of Man, painting “Fighting at the Hotel de Ville” by Jean Victor Schnetz. It is very indicative of the fervour which in contained inside. However I can’t help but feel the main subject’s face seems apathetic to his victory. The image on The Social Contract, “A Review of the Guards de la Ville de Paris – the municipal militia - outside the Hotel de Ville”, is set at the same location. It is simple, and straight to the point, but not altogether enjoyable or pleasing to the eye.

Paine’s words in Rights of Man has a great intensity and fierce tone, which I suppose is fantastically enjoyable if you happen to agree with all his arguments. I, however, could barely get past his scathing remarks and snide attitude to find exactly what his case is. I would also recommend you figure out who this Burke character is, and read whatever it was he wrote that made Paine so gosh-darn angry before commencing Rights of Man.

I found Rousseau’s arguments in The Social Contract easier to follow, and thus I found it a much more enjoyable read. Rousseau is quoted because he makes is points succinctly eg Might does not make right. Rousseau sets out his theories in a logical and rational manner, though there is still enough personal emotion not to put the reader to sleep.

I found the latter read more pleasurable as Rousseau was less prescriptive, and allows for the will of the people to choose. However, I found many of his methods for choosing a government are no longer applicable. Paine’s passion and steadfastness against certain forms of government does not allow for as much flexibility, and so I often felt like a chastised child.

Paine seems in constant fear of being caught in his own contradictions. He does not give the reader enough to credit. Several times he accuses Burke’s arguments of being so ill-founded and irrational that they do not warrant rebuttal. If the apologies and blank dismissals were cut out, the novel would be much shorter and to the point, and I would definitely be more sympathetic to his cause.

My overall winner is The Social Contract.

(less)

· see review

Jun 03, 2010

Rowland Bismark rated it

Rousseau's principal aim in writing The Social Contract is to determine how freedom may be possible in civil society, and we might do well to pause briefly and understand what he means by "freedom." In the state of nature we enjoy the physical freedom of having no restraints on our behavior. By entering into the social contract, we place restraints on our behavior, which make it possible to live in a community. By giving up our physical freedom, however, we gain the civil freedom of be...moreRousseau's principal aim in writing The Social Contract is to determine how freedom may be possible in civil society, and we might do well to pause briefly and understand what he means by "freedom." In the state of nature we enjoy the physical freedom of having no restraints on our behavior. By entering into the social contract, we place restraints on our behavior, which make it possible to live in a community. By giving up our physical freedom, however, we gain the civil freedom of being able to think rationally. We can put a check on our impulses and desires, and thus learn to think morally. The term "morality" only has significance within the confines of civil society, according to Rousseau.

Not just freedom, then, but also rationality and morality, are only possible within civil society. And civil society, says Rousseau, is only possible if we agree to the social contract. Thus, we do not only have to thank society for the mutual protection and peace it affords us; we also owe our rationality and morality to civil society. In short, we would not be human if we were not active participants in society.

This last step determines the heavily communitarian perspective that Rousseau adopts. If we can only be fully human under the auspices of the social contract, then that contract is more important than the individuals that agree to it. After all, those individuals only have value because they agree to that contract. The contract is not affirmed by each individual separately so much as it is affirmed by the group collectively. Thus, the group collectively is more important than each individual that makes it up. The sovereign and the general will are more important than its subjects and their particular wills. Rousseau goes so far as to speak of the sovereign as a distinct individual that can act of its own accord.

We might react to these arguments with serious reservations, and indeed, Rousseau has been accused of endorsing totalitarianism. We live in an age where individual rights are considered vitally important, and it is insulting to think that we are just small parts of a greater whole. Rather than make freedom possible, it would seem to us that Rousseau's system revokes freedom.

Rousseau would not take these charges lying down, however. Looking at us in the new millennium, he might suggest that we are not free at all. On the whole, we may lack any kind of personal agency or initiative. We often have difficulty interacting with one another in any meaningful way, and it could be argued that our decisions and behavior are largely dictated to us by a consumer culture that discourages individual thought.

His system, he might claim, only seems unattractive to us because we have totally lost the community spirit that makes people want to be together. Citizens in his ideal republic are not forced into a community: they agree to it for their mutual benefit. He might argue that the citizens of ancient Greece and Rome were very active and capable of achievements that we have not come close to emulating since. The community spirit that united them did not intrude upon their individuality; rather, it gave individuality an outlet for its fullest expression.

The best response to Rousseau (aside from pointing out that those societies relied on slavery and exploitation) might be to say that the world has changed since then. We could borrow from social theorist Jurgen Habermas the distinction between the public sphere and the private sphere, and suggest that Rousseau does not give careful enough attention to the latter. Though Rousseau does permit citizens to do whatever they please so long as it does not interfere with public interests, he still seems to assume that human personality is in some way public. He doesn't seem to perceive a distinction between who we are in public and what we are in private. By demanding such active citizenship, he is demanding that our public persona take precedence over our private self.(less)

· see review

Feb 03, 2010

CJ Bowen added it · review of another edition

"Man is born free, and everywhere he is in chains." I.1 (1)

"The most ancient of all societies, and the only one that is natural, is the family" I.2 (2)

"The strongest is never strong enough to be always the master, unless he transforms strength into right, and obedience into duty." I.3 (3)

"Since no man has a natural authority over his fellow, and force creates no right, we must conclude that conventions form the basis of all l...more

· see review

Feb 11, 2009

Patrick rated it

· review of another edition

The Enlightenment was perhaps one of this first periods of modern history where the ideals of tolerance and the individuals' freedom began to be discussed in the cultured circles in Europe and the United States. That being said, Rousseau's ideas had a profound effect on the learned elite, and his influence can be clearly seen in the US Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution.

Unlike many of his predecessors, Rousseau returns to a somewhat Classical approach in that man is...more

· see review

Apr 21, 2011

Jesse Lopes rated it

Of the classic social contract theorists, the "If God doesn't exist, what the fuck is society?" theorists, Rousseau seems to be the most radical and, consequently, most truthful; in Freudian terms, if Hobbes is the id and Locke the ego, Rousseau is the superego. Rousseau wants to know how we can get rid of rulers, and how we can become truly free. Certainly Hobbes is no visionary of freedom - Rousseau equates his reasoning with that of Caligula. Again, Locke is suspect of desiring chai...more

like 1 like

· see review

Mar 17, 2011

Shawn rated it

· review of another edition

He made a lot of great points in this book but I also felt that modern society had, in some ways, passed up and made some of his points irrelevant. Rousseau’s ideal reminds me of a perfect democracy in that he wants all involved and the body of the people make an irrevocable law. However, one of my big problems with a perfect democracy is almost the same problem dealt with in our republic (and here I mean our notion of a republic, not Rousseau’s definition of any legal framework ruled by the pe...moreHe made a lot of great points in this book but I also felt that modern society had, in some ways, passed up and made some of his points irrelevant. Rousseau’s ideal reminds me of a perfect democracy in that he wants all involved and the body of the people make an irrevocable law. However, one of my big problems with a perfect democracy is almost the same problem dealt with in our republic (and here I mean our notion of a republic, not Rousseau’s definition of any legal framework ruled by the people)-- that is the vast amount of laws and the girth thereof make them unwieldy. Show me a congress member that actually reads the hundreds of thousands of pages that cross his desk each day; Much less equipped is the average person who would have to deal with this as well as their daily toil.

I make this point again and again. We don’t need more laws, we need less laws and a more easily understood framework. There does not need to exist a sentence for every possible situation in existence. Besides being impossible, it is impractical. How even do you communicate all these laws to the laity? You can almost hear the cliché refrain now being touted: Ignorance of the law is no excuse. Except, as they saw in law school, when it is. Yet still the average member feels the frenetic need to be “doing,” and thus our framework sprawls like malignant cancer.

Be that as it may, here are some of the points and quotes I found interesting and my thoughts around then where applicable.

“Tranquillity is found also in dungeons; but is that enough to make them desirable places to live in?”

He says examine the people first and that if they are inappropriate don’t try to change them.

“The people of England regards itself as free; but it is grossly mistaken; it is free only during the election of members of parliament. As soon as they are elected, slavery overtakes it, and it is nothing. The use it makes of the short moments of liberty it enjoys shows indeed that it deserves to lose them.” The same could be said of these United States.
 “In a well-ordered city every man flies to the assemblies: under a bad government no one cares to stir a step to get to them, because no one is interested in what happens there, because it is foreseen that the general will will not prevail, and lastly because domestic cares are all-absorbing.”

He had a few chapters where it argued that different people need different government because their differences in diet, consumption, and climate. It seemed ridiculously immature given today’s global economy.

He talks a lot about all of the people being involved and that they cannot be wrong and that they have no will. However, what about the tyranny of the majority? What about the preservation of rights of those that are under represented?

On the joys of being stupid: “Men who are upright and simple are difficult to deceive because of their simplicity; lures and ingenious pretexts fail to impose upon them, and they are not even subtle enough to be dupes.”

On religion: “Every religion, therefore, being attached solely to the laws of the State which prescribed it, there was no way of converting a people except by enslaving it, and there could be no missionaries save conquerors.”

Overall, a recommended read for all.(less)

· see review

Oct 22, 2011

GoldGato rated it

Shelves: year-round, philosophy

"Man was born free, and he is everywhere in chains."

So begins Rousseau's treatise on his view that only the people have the right to legislate, as a time when Europe was overflowing with absolute monarchies. While we don't have the same situation in the 21st century, we still have the absolute rulers (a la Gaddafi) who will always claim some sort of special right, be it divine or lineage, to put their paw prints on the people's treasuries.

Reading this always mak...more

· see review

Jan 19, 2009

St. rated it

· review of another edition

I picked up this a while ago because I had a sudden interest in politics and wanted to learn about an "alternative to our current liberal democracy" as the book jacket stated. I began to read it, but I quickly got bogged down in the reading and finally gave up. So a year later I ended up reading a biography on Rousseau. After learning about the period in which the Social Contract was written, I was able to read this book much more easily. Anyways, the Social Contract is probably Rousse...more

· see review

Mar 27, 2011

Catherine rated it

· review of another edition

Shelves: 2011, france, gender, law, work

First, this edition of The Social Contract is just exquisite. The letterpress cover, the setting, the typeface - they're beautiful things, and they make the content of the book that much more enjoyable. I'm so glad I have this particular edition of this particular book.

Second, I appreciate Rousseau's concise writing. After Hobbes and Locke, the man is positively monosyllabic (although that's only in comparison to the other two - in truth he's pretty fond of the long word), and he ce...more

· see review

May 21, 2009

Juan Pablo rated it

· review of another edition

Es este libro de Rousseau una apologia de cosas que ahora son parte de las creencias políticas más básicas, pero que en su tiempo eran motivo de disputas: la soberanía del pueblo, la libertad, los derechos individuales, etc. Es genial la parte en que critica a sus adeversarios, específicamente, los partidarios del absolutismo, con frases llenas de una fina ironía.
Debo confesar que a Rousseau lo leí con más excepticismo que a otros autores, un poco suspicaz por este optimismo sobre e...more

· see review

Jun 29, 2011

Deviant Geek rated it

Shelves: my-ebooks, audio-book, classics, politics, law

Ok. I read the first book and I wanted to write what I comprehended just so I won't forget

I don't know if its the book itself that requires much energy or the translation of that book. But I found that it needed a lot of mental processing. Because u can easily get distracted. Lose your point. And have to restart all over again. And there are parts where I had to read and reread just to grasp the author's idea

Basically, I can sum up the following
The Book admits that ...more

· see review

Jan 08, 2011

Cody rated it

· review of another edition

The Social Contract argues against the idea that monarchs are divinely empowered to legislate; only the people, in the form of the sovereign, have that all powerful right. The social contract is each of us places his or her personal authority under the general/collective will, and the group receives each individual as an indivisible part of the whole.

I appreciate Rousseau's positive outlook of humanity and how men in a state of nature are free and equal and are, as he calls them, “Nobl...more

· see review

Dec 30, 2011

Ruth rated it

· review of another edition

It's hard for me to really think about bigger governance structures b/c they're too big and far from me (which is one of Rosseau's points, I guess) but this book made me think a lot about the governance structure of my school and the assumptions that are underneath the way we do things. I liked the way the guy broke it all down- it was full of all these ideas that we kind of know already but maybe haven't heard put so simply. I couldn't get into the case study of Rome at the end, though, maybe...more

· see review

Nov 02, 2011

Myriam rated it

A book that breaks down society into minute details, going over the natural and civil freedoms, to the different types of government where democracy finds its ultimate meaning which is one that can never be attained. It was a good read but there is no denying that I dozed off at different parts of the book. It is exposed in such a dull way that it felt like I was listening to an ongoing lecture. It is a book that should be read over a certain period of time so that its concepts can be deeply und...more

· see review

Jul 21, 2011

Robyn Blaber rated it

· review of another edition

Shelves: french-literature, philosophy

Having celebrated Bastille day without having read Rousseau's The Social Contract seemed wrong somehow. It is as insightful as you would expect a 250 year old political book to be; simultaneously innovative and silly. 5 minutes of C-Span has me convinced that the US would be better off with an absolute monarchy and the lofty ideals of Locke and Rousseau relegated to the trash bin, since they both greatly underestimate the power that corporations would eventually come to hold in democratic syst...more

· see review

Nov 01, 2011

James Tyrrell rated it

· review of another edition

Shelves: social-theory, philosophy

To sum up Rousseau in a brief comment would be difficult so I wont try. I think he had all the right motivations but truly underestimates the nature of people to abuse what is written. I respectfully disagree with some of his conclusions about the will of the people being far more important than individual viewpoints. But I heartily agree with his comments on the separation of religion and politics. He has a tendency to write all the negative points towards the end of a chapter which leaves you ...more

· see review

Mar 06, 2010

Eric rated it

· review of another edition

Shelves: political-philosophy

I found The Social Contract a frustrating read. What is offered with one hand is taken away with the other. I found that although Rousseau makes many individually insightful points that offer a remarkable assessment of reality, he fails in assessing reality on other points thereby weakening his overall conclusion.

One example of Rousseau wanting to have his cake and eat it too may be the following. He famously writes, "Man is born free and he is everywhere in chains." (B...more

· see review

Dec 23, 2008

Philip rated it

Shelves: classics, non-fiction

Wow. I think it'd be good to have a background knowledge of Livy especially The Early History of Rome. Rousseau references a lot of archaic work which makes for tough reading if it's unfamiliar.

Much of what Rousseau wrote should be common knowledge to those who've lived in free democratic states all their lives. (I.e. citizens agree to enter into the Social Contract by default - if they live in a given (free) society they agree to follow the Rule of Law or leave.) We all unders...moreWow. I think it'd be good to have a background knowledge of Livy especially The Early History of Rome. Rousseau references a lot of archaic work which makes for tough reading if it's unfamiliar.

Much of what Rousseau wrote should be common knowledge to those who've lived in free democratic states all their lives. (I.e. citizens agree to enter into the Social Contract by default - if they live in a given (free) society they agree to follow the Rule of Law or leave.) We all understand this, but Rousseau goes into detail to explain the hows and whys... He goes through who has the right to rule, and how they acquired it. He differentiates between natural equality and moral equality and then goes into the institutions of governments..."that the social pact, far from destroying natural equality, substitutes, on the contrary, a moral and lawful equality for whatever physical inequality that nature may have imposed on mankind; so that however unequal in strength and intelligence, men become equal by covenant and by right."

Reading Rousseau also brings to light some theological points that always aggrivate me. I wish the Bible had a book dedicated to governments, and the proper ways for governments to act. Granted, it has Romans 13, and Christ talks to a centurion here and there, but the Bible is for the individual, and not the government. He makes arguements for everyone's duty to serve in the military at the end of Book II chapter 4. As a Christian I always take up one side of this argument and then quickly switch to the other side when confronted by opposition to my stance. Rousseau: "Their very lives, which they have pledged to the state, are always protected by it; and even when they risk their lives to defend the state, what more are they doing but giving back what they have received from the state?"

And speaking of religion, Introduction, pg. 41: "... he belongs to a certain tradition of moral philosophers who argue that to be free is not to be left to do what you want to do but to be enabled to do what you ought to do."

This sounds so much like what Paul talks about, i.e. freedom in Christ. (Or slave to Christ...) We're free to sin, but Christ enables us to do what we ought, even though the capacity to sin is still there.

I find it interesting too that Rousseau was both Christian and sort of writing against Christianity - the state needs a religion that contradicts everything that Christianity is... Book IV chapter 8, "Everything that destroys social unity is worthless; and all institutions that set man at odds with himself are worthless." And yet Rousseau himself claimed to be a Christian.

Last, I do wonder how much he influenced our (U.S.)independence movement, as well as the French movement. (Especially things instances like the Great Terror.) I mean, I'd personally hate to have the Great Terror on my conscience, but then again Rousseau did write this: "Moreover, since every wrongdoer attacks the society's law, he becomes by his deed a rebel and a traitor to the nation; by violating its law, he ceases to be a member of it; indeed he makes war against it... therefore the right of war makes it legitimate to kill him." Jeepers. A rough time to live in France.

Anyway, what do you give a book like this? An "it was ok" "I liked it" "it was amazing?" I mean moreso than whether I liked it or not, it was amazing in how much it effected the world... of course, it was more of a difficult read, which made me like it less. Four stars it is.(less)

· see review

Feb 09, 2008

Chris rated it

· review of another edition

Shelves: classics, politics, philosophy, society

This is one of Penguin's "Great Ideas" books, which I am a big fan of. They're short books, for about 1000 yen a pop, and some of the most important writings in Western history. And I'm a big fan of important writings. So, when I went back to Junkudo, I picked up a couple more editions.

Before this, I opened up An Attack on an Enemy of Freedom by Cicero, which presented an interesting dilemma - can I include in the reading list a book that I almost finished? I mean, I slogge...moreThis is one of Penguin's "Great Ideas" books, which I am a big fan of. They're short books, for about 1000 yen a pop, and some of the most important writings in Western history. And I'm a big fan of important writings. So, when I went back to Junkudo, I picked up a couple more editions.

Before this, I opened up An Attack on an Enemy of Freedom by Cicero, which presented an interesting dilemma - can I include in the reading list a book that I almost finished? I mean, I slogged pretty far through that book, which seemed to consist mostly of Cicero insulting Marc Antony and then saying that he wasn't there to insult Marc Antony. My favorite part was where he reminded everyone that, in his youth, Marc Antony was a boy-whore who inflamed the passions of men.

You just don't see that kind of political discourse these days.

Anyway, I got bored with it, so I dropped the book and decided that it wouldn't count in the official lineup.

The next book I got was this one, and I was a little worried that I might have to drop it too. I mean, this is required reading for every PoliSci student, so I know I read it before. it's just that I couldn't remember it. Not a damn thing about it.

As it turns out, this is Rousseau's attempt to figure out why we need government, and most importantly, what kind of government was the "best." He started, as was the trend at the time, from first principles: in the state of Nature, what liberties and motivations does Man enjoy? And how does this change once a society is formed? There has to be - there will almost inevitably be - a system of laws and governance in such a society, so which one best compensates for the loss of the natural liberty to do as we please?

Long story short, democracy. In Rousseau's ideal world, every citizen would be involved with the governance of the country at all times. But even he understands that this won't always work. People are busy, you know.... Still, he says at one point, "As soon as someone says of the business of the state - "What does it matter to me?" - then the state must be reckoned lost."

Pretty good, and a sentiment that needs to be resurrected. His main idea, his core belief, was that the society and the citizen were one, indivisible, and that as society had the duty of protecting its citizens, the citizens had the duty to uphold society. I think Rousseau would look at the current state of affairs in the nation he helped inspire and be very disappointed....

The end of the book is a long, drawn-out ramble on the history of the Roman republic, which gets kind of dull until he hits his section on civil religion. He falls square on the side of a separation of church and state. A Christian state, he says, would collapse almost as soon as it was formed. It would either be crushed from the outside or eaten from the inside. "Christianity preaches only servitude and submission. Its spirit is too favourable to tyranny for tyranny not to take advantage of it. True Christians are made to be slaves; they know it and they hardly care.; this short life has too little value in their eyes...."

Take that, Falwell....(less)

· see review

Jan 04, 2008

Chris rated it

· review of another edition

My first contact with the Social Contract transpired back in those doldrums which is usually just dumped into a general catch-all called teenage. It was profound, it was moving and enlightening, so naturally I didn’t know anyone else I could discuss this book with as nobody else seems to be pondering the bigger things in life; my classmates and peers were completely useless in my hopes to talk about this work, and the societal elders I was familiar with were equally ignorant of the importance o...moreMy first contact with the Social Contract transpired back in those doldrums which is usually just dumped into a general catch-all called teenage. It was profound, it was moving and enlightening, so naturally I didn’t know anyone else I could discuss this book with as nobody else seems to be pondering the bigger things in life; my classmates and peers were completely useless in my hopes to talk about this work, and the societal elders I was familiar with were equally ignorant of the importance of this timeless masterpiece (and the latter may be more disturbing as these people were generally given the title of teacher). On the few occasions where I’ve been afforded the opportunity to invoke the name of this classic, most people think I’m spouting gibberish and have lost my f@cking mind; of course these are usually very drunken instances, such as the time I went totally apeshit on a hotel pool deck. I usually keep discussion of this book to a minimum these days, only shrieking “This is a breach of Social Contract!” when being attacked or otherwise having my life or livelihood threatened; this fails to convey the importance of Rousseau’s legacy.

This grand, conceptual book also happens to be one of the last things worth a wad of zebra jit to come out of France, and though most scholars will be quick to note that the thoughts contained within were instrumental to the advent of the French Revolution, nobody seems to give it mention for turning about a dozen kids into lifelong socialists every year; a truly remarkable feat in a diseased, gluttonous, avaricious, cesspool like 1990s America. All I can offer about the book is this: most people, the masses of simpletons clogging up the works and forward progress of the world at large, are simply not ready for this book.

Luckily, Rousseau and his Social Contract don’t play that weak shit; this was written simply because Jean-Jacques had the foresight to recognize something is perverting the ties that bind men and something had better be done about it before everyone is swept into a cataclysmic societal vacuum which none dare wish for; civil unrest and entropy spiraling the better part of a billion people into an Armageddon-like madness. The days of Apocalypse. Ragnorak. But enough of that banter, this book succeeds because the debated subject is social structure and the proper rule of the people while still managing to keep some semblance of individual nature within it; the unthinkable task of creating an ideal government. The book isn’t perfect, and I do believe it actually strives to be, which can be a deterrent at points; nothing is worse than hearing an acolyte of some great truth expound upon something which just isn’t correct. We can leave that by the wayside, for the foundation for Rousseau’s bothersome suggestions is solid and worthy of respect. Fully deserving inclusion as one of Pengiun’s heralded ‘Great Ideas’ series, and as a sidenote, not only is this odd-sized paperback packaging the housing of such a phenomenal work, but the edition itself is f@cking gorgeous, contrasting in bold blue and white (while not even being boldly colored), and an incredible debossed styling.(less)

like 1 like

· see review

Aug 11, 2010

Adriano Godinho rated it

· review of another edition

Recommends it for: everyone

Recommended to Adriano by: no one

Shelves: classics, europe, politics, social-studies, 18th-century, books-that-changed-the-world

Society is made of people. People and rules, and respect and above all: tolerance. We're all different and there's as many societies as there's persons in the world. We are free. free to choose want we want from our lives and free to do it, and that's wonderful! we're no slaves and we don't live at war (for some of us this is not true, unfortunately). but society changed a lot, as the centuries passed by, and now we're living peaceful times.
We vote! (not all societies in the world) even if...more

· see review

Sep 26, 2009

Carol rated it

· review of another edition

Shelves: swiss, non-fiction

In an effort to learn more about the history of Geneva, I read this book written by one of its native sons, Jean-Jacques Rousseau. A political theory book published in 1762 and translated from the French, I didn't expect it to be an easy read and it wasn't, but it was very interesting and surprisingly relevant to the problems in governments and societies around the world today. It was worth reading it for the chapters on democracy and "The Civil Religion."

I can't say I...more

· see review

Dec 01, 2010

Derek rated it

· review of another edition

Shelves: politcal-philosophy, politics-and-government

When I read classics like this I'm humbled by the fact that our times are NOT extraordinary. I realize time and time again that "the founding fathers" had it all figured out already. The Social Contract is a treatise on the what, how and why of legitimate government, and provides insight into the reasons that governments decay and what illegitimate government looks like.

GREAT read.

· see review

Mar 04, 2009

D rated it

· review of another edition

Recommends it for: anyone who says that people who don't support the war don't support the troops

Recommended to D by: read in class

Shelves: nonfiction, philosophy, policy

Undoubtedly, Thoreau, were he alive circa 1760, would have been JJ's BFF. (<-- that's as sophisticated as my analysis gets. READER: but, then, why did you give it three stars? DEB: it's a classic, people. what am i going to do, tell JJ he was wordy? argue for tyranny? admit i don't remember much about this and so not give it a star rating at all?? READER: . . . DEB: . . .])

· see review

« previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 … 265 266 next »

new topic
Discuss This Book

topics	posts	views	last activity
Social	1	7	Nov 24, 2011 06:27am

combine
Other Editions (132)

More editions...

Genres

Philosophy

324 users

Non Fiction

106 users

Politics

87 users

Classics

65 users

Cultural > France

24 users

History

19 users

Politics > Political Science

16 users

Philosophy > Theory

10 users

Academic > School

9 users

Literature > 18th Century

8 users

See top shelves...

Readers Also Enjoyed

About Jean-Jacques Rousseau

Jean-Jacques Rousseau remains an important figure in the history of philosophy, both because of his contributions to political philosophy and moral psychology and because of his influence on later thinkers. Rousseau's own view of philosophy and philosophers was firmly negative, seeing philosophers as the post-hoc rationalizers of self-interest, as apologists for various forms of tyranny, and as pl...moreJean-Jacques Rousseau remains an important figure in the history of philosophy, both because of his contributions to political philosophy and moral psychology and because of his influence on later thinkers. Rousseau's own view of philosophy and philosophers was firmly negative, seeing philosophers as the post-hoc rationalizers of self-interest, as apologists for various forms of tyranny, and as playing a role in the alienation of the modern individual from humanity's natural impulse to compassion. The concern that dominates Rousseau's work is to find a way of preserving human freedom in a world where human beings are increasingly dependent on one another for the satisfaction of their needs. This concern has two dimensions: material and psychological, of which the latter has greater importance. In the modern world, human beings come to derive their very sense of self from the opinion of others, a fact which Rousseau sees as corrosive of freedom and destructive of individual authenticity. In his mature work, he principally explores two routes to achieving and protecting freedom: the first is a political one aimed at constructing political institutions that allow for the co-existence of free and equal citizens in a community where they themselves are sovereign; the second is a project for child development and education that fosters autonomy and avoids the development of the most destructive forms of self-interest. However, though Rousseau believes the co-existence of human beings in relations of equality and freedom is possible, he is consistently and overwhelmingly pessimistic that humanity will escape from a dystopia of alienation, oppression, and unfreedom. In addition to his contributions to philosophy, Rousseau was active as a composer and a music theorist, as the pioneer of modern autobiography, as a novelist, and as a botanist. Rousseau's appreciation of the wonders of nature and his stress on the importance of feeling and emotion made him an important influence on and anticipator of the romantic movement. To a very large extent, the interests and concerns that mark his philosophical work also inform these other activities, and Rousseau's contributions in ostensibly non-philosophical fields often serve to illuminate his philosophical commitments and arguments.
(less)

More about Jean-Jacques Rousseau...

Books by Jean-Jacques Rousseau

More…

Share This Book

Facebook Twitter Your website

Pin It

Trivia About Du Contrat Social

No trivia or quizzes yet. Add some now »

Quotes from The Social Contract

“Every man having been born free and master of himself, no one else may under any pretext whatever subject him without his consent. To assert that the son of a slave is born a slave is to assert that he is not born a man.” — 27 people liked it

“The word ‘slavery’ and ‘right’ are contradictory, they cancel each other out. Whether as between one man and another, or between one man and a whole people, it would always be absurd to say: "I hereby make a covenant with you which is wholly at your expense and wholly to my advantage; I will respect it so long as I please and you shall respect it as long as I wish.” — 14 people liked it

More quotes…

Groups That Shelved Du Contrat Social

Philosophy

969 members

last activity Feb 09, 2012 07:29am

shelf: read

Around the World in 80 Books

332 members

last activity 2 hours, 47 min ago

shelf: read

title link	preview: The Social Contract
avg rating	preview: The Social Contract Goodreads rating: 3.62 (4250 ratings)
small image	preview: click here [close]
med image	preview: click here [close]
BBCode	[url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/763942.The_Social_Contract?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book][img]http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1178144264m/763942.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/763942.The_Social_Contract?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book]The Social Contract by Jean-Jacques Rousseau[/url]

The Social Contract

Friend Reviews

Community Reviews

Readers Also Enjoyed

Share This Book

Share This Book on Your Website