Rousseau’s Social Contract, part 4
We are starting out with the first three chapters in Book 2 of Rousseau’s Social Contract this time.
Full show notes here.
We get some really bad arguments in which Rousseau abuses the terms “inalienable” and “indivisible” in order to help his system parrot the natural rights/classical liberal terminology while having none of their logical consistency.
He goes on to try to explain whether or not the “general will” can be fallible, and ends up creating one of the most absurd and twisted-up arguments I’ve ever seen.
Over and over again he says he’ll be pushing some of his most fundamental arguments towards later, and I’m growing ever more sure that the reason is because he wants to spend more time befuddling you and indoctrinating you so that you’ll be receptive to his egregious nonsense.
The contents I’m covering in this part are so self-contradictory that I really only have one reference for you: my coverage of Locke’s chapters on Usurpation and Tyranny, because Rousseau hints at making the same distinction but ends up being so vague that he’s useless.
This video is available on Odysee, YouTube, and BitChute.
Return to the table of contents for this book critique.
Locke on Usurpation and Tyranny:
https://marginalnonhermit.com/?p=694
Intro quote by Guglielmo Piombini and Bernardo Ferrero in this essay:
https://mises.org/mises-wire/rousseau-guevara-marx-and-more-moral-and-intellectual-bankruptcy-left
Intro music courtesy Pixabay:
https://pixabay.com/music/main-title-just-a-regular-day-123252/