Scan barcode
A review by jeremygoodjob
Of the Social Contract and Other Political Writings by Jean-Jacques Rousseau
3.0
It makes sense to me that incels and young republicans love to read all this stuff: society is conceived of as a sand castle that can be reformed, destroyed, and re-constructed all according to what is rationally optimal. In Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau there are no dizzying complexities or vast bureaucracies; there are no racial disparities because race does not exist. My sense is that in Rousseau’s eyes these would all be unnecessary complications that highlight how democracy becomes burdensome and ineffective at large scale.
Similar to Locke, Rousseau’s conjecture on the history of society and various forms of government sounds like the rambling of an over-confident dorm-room philosopher. But he’s pretty funny, and his underlying thesis seems right to me: we are forever in chains, and our relationship with government and society is necessarily one of conflict over power. It’s striking to me that it’s more politically motivating today to allege a vast, devil-worshipping, child-grooming conspiracy than to simply frame a citizen’s relationship with their representatives as a lifelong fight, but it’s wild that JJ was writing this 250 years ago.
Similar to Locke, Rousseau’s conjecture on the history of society and various forms of government sounds like the rambling of an over-confident dorm-room philosopher. But he’s pretty funny, and his underlying thesis seems right to me: we are forever in chains, and our relationship with government and society is necessarily one of conflict over power. It’s striking to me that it’s more politically motivating today to allege a vast, devil-worshipping, child-grooming conspiracy than to simply frame a citizen’s relationship with their representatives as a lifelong fight, but it’s wild that JJ was writing this 250 years ago.