The aspect of social contract theory can be stated as an orientation. Here it is has been observed that people will respect the fact that other may have different perspective and opinions. In this stage, the choices made by each individual are not judged as correct or wrong. Here the rules and regulations, as well as the law, are social guidelines rather than strict dictums. Here is what is called democracy. Rousseau and King worked on this principle but under different circumstances.
Jean Jacques Rousseau, who believed that a man has a passionate and emotional side, was born in Geneva, Switzerland on June 18, 1712. This philosopher wrote different books and concepts about man as an individual and man as part of society. His “Social Contract” is one of the most intriguing writings of Rousseau because he defends man, though being part of the society has its own right in terms of privacy. One of the most famous lines of Rousseau was “Never exceed your rights, and they will soon become unlimited” (Rousseau, p.1).
He said these in relation to his “Social Contract”. His point in this statement is that everyone must take their steps one at a time. Everything should be done carefully at the right time and in the right places so that it will be meaningful and productive. His writings made a divergence in different parts of the world. He became popular and famous with the help of these writings. One of his writings or stories was entitled Confessions. This story is about the life of a man. He confessed everything about his life. It can also be a form of a biography of the narrator or maybe the author himself. He pointed different things in this story – his life, journey, and beliefs. It is sometimes said that the sword wears out the scabbard. That is my history. My passions have made me live, and my passions have killed me (Lawall, p. 676). Rationality in life is the most important aspect of living for Rousseau. After all, logic and rationality was not the only answer to living a better life. There is something better from thinking and reasoning. “This is what I have done, what I have thought, what I was. I have told the good and bad with equal frankness. I have neither have omitted anything bad nor interpolated anything good. If I have occasionally made use of some immaterial embellishments, this has only been in order to fill a gap caused by lack of memory” (Lawall, p. 664).With these lines, there is a realization about the effects of his situation. The narrator witnessed his own journey and this journey made him believed that living is not always a form of reasoning and logic. Sometimes, as humans, we need to rest our minds for more important things to think of.
On the other hand, Martin Luther King Jr. was to the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s what Jean Jacques Rousseau was to the French Revolution in the 18th century. He was a charismatic, dedicated intelligent, and religious human being. He had immensely inspired the confidence of the American public in the last century. He invoked the basic morals of the Americans and led civil rights activities in a non-violent manner. He helped to unify the people of the USA in troubled times, guiding them at every step in time.
He also took part in the student sit-in movement in 1960 and was later arrested for it. He had to stay for some time in the prison after which he was released. He constantly took part in various non-violent protests and was awarded the Noble Peace Prize in 1964. This was a very important year as the civil rights movement had gained widespread support and the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was finally passed (Bostdorff, pp. 661-67).
Rousseau, similarly, had noticed a lot of fundamental differences between human nature and society. He believed that humans were better when an individual is in a state of nature. It is the common state of all the other animals and is the condition humans were in long before the beginning of society and civilization itself. The idea of his has often been led to assigning the use of noble savage to him. He, however never used this expression himself and it does not properly present his thinking for the natural goodness of all humankind. His idea concerning natural goodness is complicated and thus, very easily misunderstood.
An informal reading of his work suggests that his ideas do not simply mean that humans in this state of nature always act morally. On the contrary, terms, like wickedness or justice, are merely not applicable to pre-political societies. Humans, there can behave like a ferocious animals. They are nice since they are self-contained and are, thus, are not the focal point to the frailties of the political society. Rousseau viewed society as an artificial entity and thought that the growth of any society, mainly the development of public interdependence, is unfavorable for the welfare of humans (Rousseau, pp. 133-5).
In 1695, the African Americans started to withdraw their support from Martin Luther King Jr. as they were becoming more and more impatient with his ways of non-violent resistance. In 1965, during the Alabama march for voting rights of the people, opposition towards him became more widespread when the state troopers confronted the marchers, led by him, and they only kneeled down to pray and then left. The radical group of African Americans alleged that Martin Luther King Jr. should have behaved differently. As the Black Power movement became stronger, he started to become a controversial figure.
Martin Luther King Jr. immensely cared about the people of the USA and thus, wholeheartedly opposed the Vietnam War, which spoiled his relations with the administration. His focus was on the poor, of the various races in the USA, and had worked out a plan to organize the Poor People’s March on Washington in 1968. During the time of the civil rights movement, he had captivated the nation with his powerful philosophy and his commitment to the methods of non-violence. He also proved that only by non-violence, racial segregation can be forever be terminated from society. Martin Luther King’s ideas about non-violence were similar to that of Jean Jacques Rousseau’s ideas given in The Social contract. He realizes that although the power of human love is a driving force, it was not enough to resolve the various social problems and ills. The power of human love could be applied to stop conflicts between individuals but not for the whole nation or the racial groups. He was also motivated by Mahatma Gandhi’s concept of Satyagraha, which means both truth-force and love force.
Similarly, the goodness of humankind is like the goodness of the animals and not of their virtue, which has been clearly mentioned in The Social Contract. A very extraordinary change in man is produced in the passage, which is from the state of nature to the civil state. Here justice has been substituted for instinct in man’s conduct and his actions have been given morality, which they formally lacked. He also instead of listening only to his inclinations consults his reasoning power. Even though being in this state man is deprived of certain advantages he had earlier got from nature, he gains a lot, more which develops and stimulates his faculties. His ideas are extended, his feelings are dignified and his entire soul is lifted up. Rousseau believed that only in the context of corruption of the society and the individual of the society there is a chance of failure of the social contract. On the other hand, amour proper is not natural, but artificial. It pushes man to judge himself against others creating unnecessary fear and allowing humans to enjoy while others are in pain and are suffering (Rousseau, pp. 137-8).
He said that the advancements in the various fields of knowledge have made the governments more and more powerful letting them squash a person’s liberty. In his The Social Contract, Rousseau creates concepts of equality and personal liberty. He believed, in order to obey the natural state of man and for the total survival of a state, we continuously need to change our ideas of equality. Poor representation of some citizens, in the interest of the state, is clearly shown as an exit way for leaving the society. This was Rousseau’s political way to stabilize the inconsistent relations in the self-interest of the people and for the expansion of political freedom. When the minorities leave a state, its survival and the various reasons for creating conflict forever remain unchecked.
In The Social Contract, he also pays a lot of attention to shifting individual rights onto the formation of the state. When the state has been created, it should be due to the realization that the different elements humans cannot handle on their own can be handled better by an added centralized power, which is the state. However, Rousseau also believed that the state could fail humans at certain times and it should never enjoy an unequal share of power in comparison to the humans in the previous state of nature. If humans gave up their liberty then it would mean that they are giving up their ability to negotiate with other members of the state. This would be like slavery (Noone, pp. 68-70).
King believed that the Christian principles of love together with the method of non-violence were the only effective weapon that was available to the demoralized people in their fight for freedom. At this time, this earlier logical realization regarding the power of love was also put into use. Non-violent resistance slowly but steadily became the ultimate force behind the boycott movement and he realized that non-violence was the only powerful solution to all of society’s problems (Bostdorff, pp. 661-690).
Martin Luther King Jr. realized that there are six important aspects of non-violent resistance. He said that although non-violence may be viewed as a person’s cowardliness, it certainly is not so. According to him, a non-violent activist has the same amount of passion as a violent one. Although he is not physically aggressive, his emotions and mind are continuously active, and is relentlessly trying to inform his opponent of his mistakes. He believed that non-violence was meant to create moral shame, as it does not intend to humiliate the opponent but rather gain his trust, understanding, and finally friendship. The use of non-cooperation and boycotts were only ways to arouse a sense of honesty and moral shame in a person. Violent resistances created chaos and a lot of bitterness among the people but non-violence brought about settlement and redemption. Non-violent resistance did bring about suffering and it required the people’s eagerness to suffer. More than safety, people needed to aim for the end of the struggle, and retaliating with violence would only distract people from the actual fight (Kirk, p. 143).
In conclusion, it should be mentioned that both Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Martin Luther King Jr. believed that if people accepted suffering, it would create a number of transforming and educational possibilities. There is also a realization of the fact that life is what we make it. There is no such thing as a deeper explanation of how man lived and survived during his lifetime. There mere fact of living is that you must live your life to the fullest. All of us needs our mind to decide on how our future will be. However, there are certain things in life that sometimes don’t need any logician, mathematician, or reasoning aspect of our minds – we just need to take the risk and try to take all the opportunities no matter how hard or risky it will be. The most important thing that we should remember was faith. Faith will bring us to our final destination no matter how good or bad it will be, it will always be our destiny. This would become a strong force in changing the way of thinking of the people. King, particularly, had the opinion that a non-violent protestor was on the side of justice. In addition, since God himself favors those who are true, the non-violent protestors had faith that justice would be served in the near future.
References
- Rousseau, Jean Jacques; Constitution/Conservatism; Extended News Editorial; 2001. Web.
- Lawall, Sarah. Norton Anthology of world literature. New York: Norton. 2002
- Rousseau, Jean-Jacques; The Social Contract: & Discourses; J.M. Dent & sons, ltd., 1920
- Noone, John B; Rousseau’s Social Contract: A Conceptual Analysis; University of Georgia Press, 1981
- Bostdorff, Denise M & Steven R. Goldzwig; History, Collective Memory, and the Appropriation of Martin Luther King, Jr; Presidential Studies Quarterly, 35, 4, 661-690; The College of Wooster; Marquette University; 2005
- Kirk, John A; Martin Luther King Jr; Pearson Longman, 2004