Marx Vs Rousseau Essay

Rousseau and Marx both address a notion of "chains" in society in their writings and have defined this notion to be very different sets of constraints. Rousseau concluded that the "chains" that restrict society is one in the form of laws. Marx, on the other hand, sees the "chains" to be that of a class struggle. This leaves us with many questions, ranging from the legitimacy of the chains on society and if society could exist without them. Taking both writers views of "chains" into view one can see that no matter how you try to rid society of them, they will always exist. In order to understand how it is possible for a society to function with them, we must first understand both authors' concepts of what the "chains" really are and all forms of them. In The Social Contract, we are
But this is not limited to just the development of an unforeseen "chain". Both societies, as purposed by Rousseau and Marx, did not factor the strength of man's self-interests enough. So, how do we make societies work? Through the implementation of "chains", as defined by both Marx and Rousseau, we can make it function. If we were to make all laws follow that of society's general will, and restructure the class system where the minority is not in charge of the majority, that is to compromise with both theorists, we could have a functional society. "As a result of the contract they find themselves in a situation preferable in real terms to that which prevailed before," (Social Contract, II, 4, p.77). Rousseau never tried to rid society of "chains"; he tried to legitimize the ones it was subjected to. Marx on the other hand through legitimizing what he saw as "chains", removed society from them and placed them into a set of "chains" unforeseen and far heavier. But, no matter how you try to adjust the "chains" something will always be put back in their place no matter if it is destructive or