Comparing The Social Contract And Animal Farm

When speaking of The French Revolution, Rousseau another thinker of the Enlightenment implemented the theory of the social contract. The Social contract created during the enlightenment period influenced the French Revolt in a major way. The social contract developed the idea that power of government should remain in the hands of the natives. Rousseau ideas provided the foundation for the stable governments in which the revolution would soon create. His philosophy stressed social equality and freedoms which eventually led to the overthrow of the monarchy of the French government at the time.

Rousseau’s beliefs coincided with the beliefs of other Enlightenment thinkers. This is shown when he writes, “Duty and interest thus equally require the two contracting parties [the people and the government] to aid each other mutually” (Document 3). In that period of history, it was typical for people to be ruled by a monarch and they had very little say, if any, in the laws and policies that impacted their day to day life. Rousseau felt that the system was outdated and it made citizens feel as if they were living in someone else’s home rather than their own, so he theorized that by fabricating a system in which the government and the people are forced to work together, it creates a sense of unity and equality. This works because “ … an offense against one of its members is an offense against the body politic.

Throughout the past month, we have read and discussed both The Social Contract by Jean-Jaques Rousseau and The Racial Contract by Charles Mills’. As I said before, the two philosophers derive from very opposing backgrounds, their literary works theorize vital agreements between the members of a society that unite them for the overall benefit of its citizens. Each philosopher addresses the elements and ideas, but Charles Mills’ tackles the elephant in the room involving the issue of race. Because of his ability to see the need for this unspoken issue to be incorporated, I believe that Mills' Racial Contract is more persuasive. Both Rousseau's Social Contract and Mills' Racial Contract are inferred agreements that are existent throughout

The questions of the whether social inequality is justified and the extent of government to address said inequality are some of the foundations upon which societies and economies are built. Two key philosophers on this issue – John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau – differ on this subject. In Two Treatises on Government, Locke holds that individuals have a right to property derived from their labor, citizens consent to the existence of inequality in society, and governments are instituted among men to protect said property. In contrast, Rousseau writes in Discourse on the Origin of Inequality and The Social Contract that inequality should be strictly limited and that governments have a duty to act in the best interest of its citizens by maintaining

Rousseau’s hypothesis was similar to Locke’s in that man was naturally good and would be content in the state of nature. Rousseau was in favour of individual freedom and independence. In contrast to Hobbes he believed that human life in the state of nature would not be clouded by selfishness and that men would not have this unearthly desire to acquire more possessions, for which he would have no need or desire. Rousseau’s theory unlike Locke’s theory states that men would be independent and not need to rely on each other. He states “man is born free, but he is everywhere in chains".

He based his beliefs off of the ideas that all men are created good-natured, but society corrupts them. Unlike some other French Enlightenment thinkers, Rousseau believed that the Social contract was not a willing agreement. He also said that no man should be forced to give up their natural rights to a ruler. He came up with the solution that people should “give up” their natural rights to the community for the public’s good. He believed in a democratic government.

Many revolutions have similar characteristics whether they are non fiction or fictional. This is shown in the Korean War and in Animal Farm. Even though the revolution in Animal Farm is Fictional a lot of the characteristics to the Korean War or Korean Revolution are alike. Throughout the course of the Korean War, North Korea’s leader Kim Il-Sung, had similar characteristics to Animal Farm’s Napoleon, such as they were both dictators.

The first difference is who should the General Will be determined to. In Rousseau’ opinion, the social contract would not exclude anyone, and would “receive each member as an indivisible part of the whole” (Rousseau 8). However, in contrast to Rousseau’s “whole society,” Sieyes indicated that the Third Estate in France represented everything. The first reason why Sieyes stated so was that the First and the Second Estate were “like ravenous wolves,” who could not think of anything “but subduing and enslaving their neighbors” (Rousseau 107) while the Third Estate was the ones who carried out the work that sustained society (Lualdi 113). The second reason was that the nobles had all kinds of privileges and exemptions, “and even rights that are distinct from the rights of the great body of citizens” (Lualdi 115); therefore, they should be excluded from the common law.

Furthermore, Napoleon gives the other animals the impression he was the sole leader of the rebellion on Animal farm and makes Snowball -a leader who wanted what was best for the animals- seem like an enemy who was in cahoots with Farmer Jones since long before the animals took over the farm. Napoleon and Squealer (another “fat cat” pig.) always put the blame on Snowball whenever something went wrong in the farm to avoid having the blame fall on them. Napoleon is an exemplary example of just how selfish and hypocritical people can be in furthering their own aims because he continued to subtly but purposely change the seven rules put in place as the pillars of animalism. For example, Napoleon and the other pigs move into Farmer Jones’s house and sleep in his bed after commanding “No animal shall sleep in a bed”, so he changes the commandment to read “no animal shall sleep in a bed with sheets”.

He claims that “all that is required for this enlightenment is freedom,” meaning that a person is free once, as he defines it, is no longer controlled by his or her impulses or by other people (What is Enlightenment?). Rousseau also took a similar stance because he argued that “man is born free; and everywhere he is in chains” (The Social Contract). His goal was to dispel inequality, even if it means resisting authority. He claims that free men stop being free when they cooperate with others because he will find out that there is inequality, so a social hierarchy is

In the book Animal Farm, there are two main “enemies” to the common animals. These two enemies, are Farmer Jones and the pig known as Napoleon. Each of these entities have their own pros and cons, and each one rules over the animals in their own way. Some may argue that Farmer Jones was a better owner, and Napoleon was bad, or vice versa. As stated before, each had their own unique way of ruling the animals and different popularity among the animals.

Ignorance is dangerous. Lack of knowledge can cause someone to be manipulated and used. Knowledge brings choice and freedom which is something that the animals in “Animal Farm” did not have. The story “Animal Farm” is a significant story because it shows that not having knowledge about certain situations can be a bad thing. The theme of the story is knowledge is power.

In any other system, the people give up their freedom without any reason; it should be created only if all agree to it. The social contract would exist for the purpose of self-preservation, pushing the common will of the Sovereign. To convince his audience of these complex ideas, Rousseau must stay organized and be intentional in his rhetorical

A key political theorist influencing the initial outbreak of the French Revolution is Jean-Jacques Rousseau. The Social Contract, written by Rousseau, provided the rights the French people initially demanded. In the Social Contract, Rousseau delegitimizes absolute monarchies and popularizes rights of

“This right does not come from nature, it is therefore founded upon convention”. Rousseau does not view society in the same light as Durkheim. He does not believe that society is the savior of humans and that there is no real self without it. Unlike Durkheim, Rousseau believes that the only natural society is the traditional family and that any other form is forged out of convention. Rousseau mentions that when parents are done raising their child and that child is no longer dependent, but chooses to stay then the family is together out if convention and is then unnatural.