# The New Social Contract
*By Idhant Ranjan*
## Abstract/Introduction
In this socio-political theory, I plan on addressing a question that has plagued our governments, or sovereigns, our dictators and presidents for centuries. With mankind taking its own course, and laws existing in their own benefit, can there, or moreover, **SHOULD** there be an existing civil order with any form of legitimate rule? Of legitimate authority?
The question that we as a people, the question that we as a sophisticated, evolved society are trying to answer, is what rights allow, what does interest demand, in a way that justice, utility and human will don't take part? I begin this theory with boldly stating that you may want to challenge me. "So you want to write about politics", you may ask. You may ask "are you a legislator? A sovereign? A head of state?" I will answer neither, that is why I write on these simple politics, for if I was either a legislator, sovereign or head of state I would do, not waste time misgiving of what I could say¹.
The answer to 'Why' is simple. I was born a citizen of the free state and a member of its sovereign, working, learning and voting class. It is my right, it is my responsibility, not as a human, but a member of our free state to study public affairs². On that note, let us ask ourselves, on what constraint is the human mind made to obey? The 3 greatest minds of the Enlightenment era, Locke, Hobbes and Rousseau would all beg to differ from the current opinion, that the human mind is made to obey from constraints made from and within oneself, not from another, for it is the human will to think, it is the human will to perceive that instructs us to obey the wills of our authority.
Our dear friend Locke, with his far liberalist views would argue that society is far too evolved to restrict one's actions based on the fear of an authoritarian figure in ones lives, but it all brings us back to Locke's theory of mind³, in which we question ourselves upon the topics of identity and self. Locke went on to be the first to define self through a state of consciousness, or our ability to exercise restraint, to exercise our freedoms in the very nature and will of our existence.
If one is to put together the ideas of these foretelling thinkers and policymakers, we would come to realize that there are **4 primary laws of effective governance**. As much as these 4 thinkers would deny, they represented 4 political ideologies. Kant represented an idealistic society, Locke represented a liberal society, a true democracy that we like to believe we live in, Hobbes represented an Absolute democracy or monarchy⁶, where one non-divine entity held supreme power above all and Rousseau, arguably the most interesting of them all, proposed a variety of societies including a federalism based society.
*4 ideas, 4 governments, what will human mind choose?*
## Theory of Enlightenment
Of what a statesman must be responsible for, I as a citizen of the free world, we as a people, hold the utmost scrutiny. I depreciate it not, do not misinterpret my words. What are his functions? The question of the powers of authority have been scrutinized heavily since the arrival of the Enlightenment thinkers. A people who mean to be their own governors must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives. In short, the theory of enlightenment.
Common liberty is an upshot of the nature of man⁶. It is through the Enlightenment that we as a race have come to the understanding that political freedoms and governance exists in the nature of our existence. Without our free will neither systems would be imposed. Enlightenment is man's emergence from his self-imposed nonage. Nonage, is one's ability to use one's own understanding without another's guidance. This nonage is self imposed in the sense that its cause lies not in the lack of understanding or cognitive ability, but rather in the will of indecision and lack of courage to use one's own mind. It is the lack of *sapere aude*, or the dare to know, that has kept man in its primitive age⁷.
As Kant has said in his numerous papers regarding the enlightenment era, it is the hardest task of an individual to work himself out of the nonage⁸. It has become almost a second nature to us, to obey the authority directing us to do so. We later realize that our freedoms are so wide, that they are restricting us.
**We call it the first law of effective governance: understanding the Theory of Enlightenment⁹.**
## Theory of Mind & Inherent Virtue
It is the vastness of the human mind that enables us to be the most complex beings on this Earth we call home. But inside our brain, the most complex organ of our body, lies scores of undiscovered will, passion and talent. It is our mind that has given away to the crushing oppression of today's governments. It is our mind that is indecisive in the most crucial parts of our lives.
As aforementioned, Locke proposed a theory of mind, one that differed from those of his contemporaries. Locke proposed that the mind was built like an empty slate. It was how we came into existence. The theory in latin is known as the *tabula rasa*. He proposed that innate knowledge was a principle gained by sensory experience⁹, which has been proven to be true, yet it contradicts the theories of many others, including Rousseau.
The question we ask ourselves in regard to what we call the Social Contract, is how much authority does the state have over the individual¹⁰. The answer is quite simple yet twisted in its own matter. **The state only has enough power and authority as the individual allows them to have.** The state exists for the sole purpose of guiding us, not to direct our every move.
Many protest against our government due to various causes, yet what all of us as beings fail to understand is that the government is exercising power that was given to them by US, the people. The U.S constitution begins with the infamous line, 'We the people' for a reason. It is through the people that the government has the power they have today.
*Without the people, there is no government. But, the real question is, are there a people without a government?*
## Theory of the State of Nature
Thomas Hobbes was one of the foremost thinkers of the Enlightenment era. Despite his philosophical ideas contradicting those of Rousseau, but aligning with the liberal views of Locke, he had more in common with Rousseau than he knew. During the 17th Century, he proposed an idea, more a theory called the 'State of Nature'.
Hobbes presented a series of psychological theories that the human race has simply evolved¹¹ into a state of governance, rather than the people choosing to elect government officials. The term State of Nature refers to the ideology of pre-governmental, often primitive society.
Hobbes described the State of Nature, as *bellum omnium contra omnes*¹³, or a constant state of war. He was a pertinent believer in the nature of philosophical absolutism. In his book Leviathan, he says *non est potestas super terram quae comparetur*¹⁶, which translates to, "upon Earth, there is no one like him".
In essence, Thomas Hobbes believed that with the lack of a strong leader, a strong authority figure, we would erupt in total chaos as a society. As readers over the centuries have realized after reading his published works, Hobbes was implying the human race to be solely self-interested, and realized that we as a race would destroy ourselves in our pursuit of power, which inevitably would destroy us all.
**That covers the third law of effective governance: understanding the State of Nature.**
## Theory of Equality & Will
> "Man is born free, yet is everywhere in chains¹⁸."
In a volatile, yet somewhat predictable State of Nature, man has 3 innate impulses: *amour de soi* or Self preservation, *amour propre* or Self respect/comparison¹⁹ and pity, a repugnance of seeing suffering in others.
Rousseau argues that in the general course of evolution man begins to become civilized by comparing himself to others (*amour propre*) through a process he called perfectibility, essentially man's capacity for ideal mimicry and development by copying others²⁰.
How to find a form of association which will defend the person and goods of each member, with the collective force of all, and under which each individual, with others obeying no one but himself, is the perennial question of political philosophy²³. Rousseau argues that when entering a community or a state, one gives up parts of their freedoms to submit to the laws of the collective.
As each individual gives himself absolutely to the state, the conditions are the same for all, and precisely because of the fact that they are same for all, it is in no-one's interest to make the conditions onerous for another.
**For this, is an equal society.**
## The Locke-Rousseau Proposal
The 4 theories of effective governance were recognized as the Theory of Enlightenment (Kant)²⁴, Theory of Mind and Inherent Virtue (Locke)²⁵, Theory of the State of nature (Hobbes)²⁶ and finally, the Theory of Equality & Will (Rousseau)²⁷. These theories recognized the value of a free human mind, and its contributions to a completely equal society.
> *"The first man, having fenced in a piece of land, said 'this is mine', and found people who were naive enough to believe that he was the founder of civil society. From how many crimes, murders, wars, from how many horrors and misfortunes might anyone have saved mankind by pulling out the stakes, or filling up the ditch, and crying to his fellows. Beware of listening to this imposter, you are undone as a member of civilized society if you forget that the fruits of this Earth belong to us all, yet the Earth itself belongs to no one."*²⁸
Control and power, or as Hobbes calls it, politico-philosophical absolutism, is simply a game of mind. If one manages to convince his fellows in such a manner, one might as well be able to imagine that he is the founder of civilized society. It is all a game played by the mind.
In the ideal Lockean-Rousseau society, no one is submitting their freedoms to the state, or for others, one is submitting their freedoms for the utilitarian²⁹ idea of an equal society. The community is simply an abstract idea, a part of the individual itself. The equal community is a concept the individual creates to the boundaries of their own rationality and thinking capacity³⁰.
As long as the community has enough righteousness to believe that they live in a society where everyone is equal, as long as their mind and heart believe in it, the cause of the community will live on. Anarchists will argue that this is a copy of their State of Nature philosophy, but no, in the State of Nature, it is a *bellum omnium contra omnes*, there is no one to regulate oneself. In a Lockean-Rousseau society, **I am judge, jury and executioner. I am the society³².**
What most fail to understand in today's society, is that without the people, there is no state, no authority. Hobbes would argue that without state, there is no people. Wrong. **The people are the state.** The constitution begins with the words, 'we the people', for we are the building blocks of the authority that now oppresses us.
---
*This essay examines the fundamental question of legitimate authority through the lens of Enlightenment philosophy, proposing a new social contract where citizens are active participants rather than passive subjects in their governance.*