Locke and Rousseau both vouched for individuality and equality politically, religiously, and personally. Both had similar views on the state of nature concerning freedom. Also, both Locke and Rousseau held strong, competent opinions in regards to the purpose of government, although not all of the two thinkers’ opinions matched. However, Locke and Rousseau had opposing views respecting governmental representation within the government and further affecting the society. After John Locke’s new concepts were introduced, Jean-Jacques Rousseau proposed his personal theories concerning the Social Contract, private property, his form of government, his personal preferences, and what other aspects he had seen to be the “common good." Locke and Rousseau had differed more than agreed on these matters concerning government and its functionality.
Locke and Rousseau both vouched for political equality for both similar and different reasons. Political equality is the idea that no citizen has a more important or more valued opinion higher than any other citizen. "By political equality we refer to the extent to which citizens have an equal voice over governmental decisions” (“Political Equality”, 2001). Political, straightforward theorist, John Locke, supported equal rights in a well-governed democracy. He also defended the natural given rights of man such as the right to life, the right to liberty, and the right to property. John Locke had also expressed his personal theory that the government should constantly be securing the previously mentioned natural given rights for the citizens and their democracy-based government. Jean-Jacques Rousseau is an influential political figure and changed the way many people thought in the eighteenth century. However, Jacques was a political man in a different way than John Locke. He drafted and composed one of his most popular works, The Social Contract, which declared his own personal comprehension and theories of his groundbreaking foundations based on politics. Within the Social Contract, his idea law-binding according to the nature of the general will of the people was further extended. His famous idea, 'man is born free, but he is everywhere in chains' made others question the functionality of the government.
Individualism in government is the idea that no sides are taken prerequisite. The decision-making, such as elections, are made based on the qualifications, those who are deciding, believed are owned and shown.
Locke’s equal rights idea was not just pertaining to the realm of politics. Furthermore, he endorsed religious toleration which excluded atheism. Although Locke tolerated other religious beliefs, he did not support non-believers. Locke distinguishes faith from reason. “Finally, Locke also believed that atheists should not be tolerated. Because they did not believe they would be rewarded or punished for their actions in an afterlife, Locke did not think they could be trusted to behave morally or maintain their contractual obligations” (“John Locke”). Jean-Jacques Rousseau was undoubtedly religious. Becoming one of the greatest thinkers of all time, Rousseau held many theories concerning religion and inequality based around religion. Furthermore, he also changed many people’s ideas about inequality concerning politics. Jacques was more solely based around faith and believed religion was enough. “Although the religious origins may have emerged 2,000 years ago, the social theoretical analysis of inequality was most influentially articulated by Rousseau” (“Origin of Equality”, 2012).
Locke believed that human nature was an excuse for a person’s selfishness. In the natural state, everyone was equal and independent. All people were given a right of defense against those who threatened his given rights such as life, health, liberty, or possessions. To secure natural rights, namely man’s property, and liberty. “To understand political power aright, and derive it from its original, we must consider what state all men are naturally in, and that is, a state perfect freedom to order their actions and to dispose of their possessions and persons as they think fit, within the bounds of the law of nature, without asking leave, or depending upon the will of any other man” (Webb, 349). Rousseau theorized civilization was the main corruption factor affecting human nature. He vouched for the idea that men in a state of nature are given freedom and equality. “In Discourse on the Origin of Inequality (1755), from which this selection is taken, and in his later The Social Contract (1762), Jean-Jacques Rousseau aims to explain the origin society and the consequences flowing from the way society came into being. Does society liberate or enslave? In answering this question, Rousseau amends but also canonizes John Locke’s ideal the social contract” (Webb, 451). Moreover, Jean-Jacques alludes to the captivity humans are in without realization or recognition and how it causes issues. Personally, I side with Rousseau and believe civilization is the main factor in human nature and selfishness. Locke and Rousseau’s ideas contributed to government as well. The government controls the civilization further affecting society and the personal lives of the people in it.
The idea of the 'state of nature' is the unimaginable idea of life without any sort of government. To imagine a state of nature, we imagine away government, law, and governmental authority removed from the lives of citizens. “Locke used the claim that men are naturally free and equal as part of the justification for understanding legitimate political government as the result of a social contract where people in the state of nature conditionally transfer some of their rights to the government in order to better ensure the stable, comfortable enjoyment of their lives, liberty, and property. Since governments exist by the consent of the people in order to protect the rights of the people and promote the public good, governments that fail to do so can be resisted and replaced with new governments” (“Locke’s Political Philosophy”, 2005).
John Locke preferred government concerning a self-governed democracy referred to as a representative democracy. He believed this form of government protected naturally-given rights. Representation ensured the government is responsive to the people. Representation was a shield against oppression. Representative government serves as a means for societal stability. Alternatively, Rousseau felt that the representative democracies were deficient for all states involved. He vouched for self-governed direct democracy. Larger nation-states, he believed, were difficult to control and required more government-provided restrictions in order to maintain stability and efficiency concerning politics. Due to his being born in Geneva, Rousseau supported smaller towns over larger towns and the notion furthering the governmental system of direct democracy. Furthermore, Rousseau had also believed that smaller government permitted more of an escalation of autarchies for citizens to the government. Jean-Jacques also believed natural given rights served as important and should be prioritized over other issues, including security. Compared to modern America’s current constitutional federal representative democracy, the idea of self-government or direct democracy seems irrelevant and unrealistic to today’s government or society. However, the idea of self-government or direct democracy could potentially have a positive impact on the government and society.
Representative democracy is much different than the form of government practiced by the modern United States government today. “A representative democracy is a system of government whereby eligible members of the public are empowered to elect representatives amongst themselves to enact laws and oversee and protect their interests in government. It is the opposite of direct democracy” (“Representative Democracy”, 2017). Certain places that have adopted a representative democracy into their government gain and experience many advantages and improvements that come with the use of democracy. An advantage of a representative democracy system of government is that the public representatives oversee their political niche and further decide what the rest holds. The representatives that are chosen can cumulate and result in many demands and opinions from the public and citizens. Efficient governing is another asset to representative democracy due to the required decision-making in this form of government is quick because the representatives stand for the public. On the other hand, a direct democracy is when the public is the main factor to how decisions are made involving the government. “The United States is not a direct democracy, in the sense of a country in which laws (and other government decisions) are made predominantly by majority vote. Some lawmaking is done this way, on the state and local levels, but it’s only a tiny fraction of all lawmaking. But we are a representative democracy, which is a form of democracy” (“Is the U.S. a Republic?”, 2015).
John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau were similar considering their involvement as well as their politically opinionated and driven personalities. On the contrary, they had differing opinions about these ideas and theories. Comparing and contrasting Locke and Rousseau is not as straightforward and evident as it may seem. They both believed in the “civil society” powers. Although, for different reasons. Both men’s reasonings advance to the same idea, however. All people have given rights and should receive the respect deserved involving their natural rights. “For Locke, the state of nature is a condition of freedom and equality, but it is also a dangerous condition, unstable and insecure. The social contract involves the ceding of some rights in exchange for the order and security of society. But for Rousseau, the social contract also fixes forever the inequalities of persons and conditions under the protection of the law. Consequently, he opens The Social Contract with the famous sentence “Man is born free, and everywhere he is in chains.”” (Webb, 451). Through comparing and contrasting John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau, I have gained a more enhanced and developed understanding of democracy and its place in government in the 18th century as well as in modern-day politics and the “state of nature” and representative democracy. I have also gained a further understanding of political and religious equality.