Moi commun

Inequality emerged during the process of civilization, with the development of production and of the economy at large and therefore with the institution of private property. Inequality doesn’t belong to the “natural” man, that of the state of nature, but to the “historical” man. In the state of nature inequality is nearly inexistent, but it strengthens in the development of our capacities and of our being, until it becomes legitimate, so to speak, with the introduction of private property, which is contrary to natural right. It is only in the initial state of nature that there is equality and isolation, because natural law leads us to conservation without damaging others, driven by amour de soi and pitié.

Hence the necessity to stipulate a social contract. The necessity to create a new man and a new society, benefiting of the fact that time and civilization have improved man’s intellectual capacities. Rousseau wants to demonstrate this possibility, but emphasizing the importance of making this society free. To make the society free, he must mediate between preserving man’s freedom and a well-ordered society which entails some obligations and therefore some renunciations. The only way to create a situation in which we are free in a collectivity is to be members of a sovereign, to alienate ourselves to the whole community we are part of.

“The alienation being without reserve, the union is as perfect as it can be, and no associate has anything more to demand.”

Therefore, the only solution is the total alienation of each individual, which entails a guarantee of reciprocity vis-à-vis the respect and compliance with the contract. This will solve the condition of inequality: man is free because of full and complete equality and because of participation. Not the alienation of one’s individual liberty to others, since Rousseau doesn’t accept the idea of divine right, and doing so would entail some sort of slavery.

The general will is at the basis of this alienation. The general will is the will of the citoyen to take part in the collective legislative decision, to participate in the the common body of the contract, the moi commun, the public good.

“Each of us puts his person and all his power in common under the supreme direction of the general will, and, in our corporate capacity, we receive each member as an indivisible part of the whole.”

“At once, in place of the individual personality of each contracting party, this act of association creates a moral and collective body, composed of as many members as the assembly contains votes, and receiving from this act its unity, its common identity, its life and its will." (The Social Contract)

However, can this model he proposes be possible? How could it work if our individual interests have priority over the common good? It’s quite hard to imagine a society in which citizens surrender to the general will and give up their individual personality to the common body.

Rousseau believes that man isn’t only egotism, instinct and passions, but also reason and conscience and so he is able to look beyond his self-interest and take into account common values and listen to the general will, which is the voice community’s voice. Being the community’s voice, it is also his own voice, since it’s the moi commun that guarantees individual rights and liberties. This means that by obeying to the general will we obey ourselves and this is liberty itself: we are really free only when we are citoyens. Going against the law, the sovereign and the society would mean going against ourselves, because we are all the above.

Rousseau believes that with a “new man” this is possible and education has a key role in the creation of a new man.