According to Rousseau, people give up their complete freedom to a sovereign person or institution who will govern by what's best for them. The people are the sovereign who make laws for themselves. By giving up their freedom, they are obeying their will and remain free as they were before. The courts become the custodian of the law, and the people are free to elect individuals responsible for implementing the requirements. From the statement, it is assumed that all people are ready to give up their freedom and the governing entity has no self-interest but is a custodian of the people's interest.
Rousseau arguments are applicable in a purely democratic country where the will of the people determines who occupies the positions that govern the citizens. It is best suited to a situation where external forces do not influence the choice of the office bearers, and the people vote in a rational manner to install the right candidates to the position of power.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Additionally, the citizens are not willing to give up their total freedom and would rather install people who will take care of their selfish interest. The electorate is not united for a common goal and therefore cannot choose the right people to occupy the positions. Lack of unity and a common goal makes it impossible to elect candidates who will be fully answerable to the electorate and in this case their freedom is lost.
In a democratic country where the above statement best suits, the electorate do not fully participate in the election. From past experiences, not more than seventy percent of all voters cast their votes. Those who take part do not always vote for a single candidate. The question that remains unanswered is, are all the candidates irrespective of the party they belong to governing from what is best for the citizens?
Lately, politicians are concerned about their self-interest and that of the party they belong. They are not interested in addressing issues that affect the sovereign, and with the cycle of elections, it’s hard to remove them before their term ends. In this case, the statement by Rousseau does not hold as initially intended by the author.
