NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote
Why Should We Value Democracy The democracy is one of the major human achievements since the ancient times and society should value this aspect of their lives. We should value democracy because the notion that is opposite to it is not better for society and this assumption was proven as centuries passed. In this research we are going to talk about why people should value democracy using works of J. J. Rousseau and James Mill. Rousseau's, The Social Contract, published in 1762 after the success of his of several of his previous works, and became one of the most influential pieces of abstract political thought in Western tradition.
Many historians have in fact argued that Rousseau's abstract theories on the social contract that lie at the basis of his treatise were a direct cause for the French and American Revolutions. Rousseau's Social Contract, directly criticizes and undermines the status quo of the old regime. Rousseau criticized the flaws in the existing regime, analyzing and undermining almost all aspects of the old regime, including the role of the monarchy and the aristocracy, the under appreciated role of the general population and the role of the church and religion as a whole and its position in society. In The Social Contract, Rousseau explains that the human invention of government as a kind of contract between the governed and the authorities that govern them. Rousseau contests that humans are born completely self-sufficient and self-governing; whereas social human beings are dependant and constrained. The rights and liberties that social human beings get are derived ultimately from a general social agreement.
He theorizes that the reason human being were willing to give up individual freedom to be ruled by others was that they expected their rights, happiness, and property would be protected and therefore more secure in a formal government than an anarchic society. He argues, however, that this social contract was deeply and fundamentally flawed. With the wealthiest and most powerful members of society always having the authority, they deceived the general public into a society of permanently installed inequality. Throughout this treatise, Rousseau argues that this contract between rulers and the ruled should be rethought and changed. Government should not solely protect the wealth and rights of the powerful minority, but rather should be fundamentally based on the rights and equality of the entire population. If the current form of government doesnt properly protect and preserve these rights of liberty and equality of everyone, then that government has broken the social contract upon which the essence of political authority rested.
The Social Contract examines all aspects of society based on these ideas of a social contract between the general public and the authorities and government. One of the aspects of particular interest is that of religion, a concept that has been debated over, fought over, and killed over for centuries. Rousseau examines the ideas of Christianity and develops the concept of civil religion By criticizing all aspects of French society, Rousseau undermines the status quo of the Old Regime. By deliberately and specifically attacking the different types of religion in Europe at the time, Rousseau not only demoralizes the church but also in so doing undermines the power position of the king as monarch. By criticizing the church and questioning the power the Catholic Church holds in respect, he in turn brings into question the ideas of divine right of kings and absolute monarchy, as they are based on the power of the church.
Absolute monarchy is a term used to descried sovereign power and ultimate authority in the state resting in the hand of a king ruling under the title of divine right. This idea is pulled from the concept that god established the monarch, and it was through the monarch that god ruled over the people of the world. With their power ordained by god a Kings power was absolute. Therefore, when Rousseau questions the validity of the Catholic Church he also questions the validity of the kings divine right. Rousseau concludes his social contract with the chapter on religion. Contrary to his fellow enlightenment thinkers who, much impressed, by the novel ideas of natural science, mounted an offensive against Christianity, in particular Catholicism, Rousseau welcomed the idea of religion in society.
Although Rousseau age the need for religion, he did not support the religion of the day. Having rejected both reason and revelation, he proclaimed, The essential worship is that of the heart. God does not reject its homage, if it is sincere, in whatever form it is offered to him. The religion defended by Rousseau was a drastically subjective one, based on internal sentiment, a belief rooted in being faithful to ones feelings.
Many historians have in fact argued that Rousseau's dedication to the idea of the general will indicates that his state is as a form of secularized Christianity. Rousseau argued that once a genuinely legitimate state had been constructed, religion would be useful in shoring it up, with an ideal civil religion. He harbored the fear of competitors for loyalty with the state, holding that a well-constituted state would be tolerant of other sorts of religious activity as long as they remained internal and private. He did not believe, however that you could reform the defects within conventional, institutional religion. In Rousseau's chapter on religion, he distinguishes four types of religion, each of which he finds deserving of complaints. Mill on the other hand talks about individual liberty and social control.
Mill advocates freedom for individuals, but he does not want people to have so much freedom so that they violate the freedom of another person. Mill believes that happiness is desirable, and happiness is a conclusion. Everything that occurs in the middle is simply the means to an end. Utilitarianism is an adequate label for Mills ideology. Mill believes that more often than not, each person is the best judge as to what is beneficial to him or her and the amount of pleasure and happiness is a major aspect of utilitarianism.
According to Mill (p. 165), The preventive function of government, however, is far more liable to be abused, to the prejudice of liberty, than the punditry function; for there is hardly any part of the legitimate freedom of action of a human being which would not admit of being represented, and fairly, too, as increasing the facilities for some form or another of delinquency. The only legitimate basis for restricting others is the cause of harm to another person. Thus we need to conclude that democracy is a very strong regime that helps people to govern activities that are going to take place within their society. Many centuries passed and people were struggling for democracy and finally we have that regime and this should be valued and maintained. Bibliography: J. J.
Rousseau The Social Contract. James Mill Essay on Government.
Free research essays on topics related to: catholic church, mill believes, social contract, absolute monarchy, civil religion
Research essay sample on Absolute Monarchy Mill Believes
