rousseau and Montesquieu on socialization

Rousseau and Montesquieu views on Socialization and Political Power

Jean Jacques Rousseau and Baron de Montesquieu were great philosophers that enlightened the world with their revolutionary thoughts on different forms of government. These two philosophers inspired the debate on the origin, the necessity, and the consequences of the establishment of societies and governmental authorities. They discussed the required conditions for the sustainability of societal institutions. In his book The Persian Letters, Montesquieu makes use of fictional stories to relay his thoughts on various themes including the advantages and the disadvantages of different systems of governments, the nature of political authority, and the proper role of law. Montesquieu believes that if the right type of government is in place, it can prevent a state of war. As an opposing view, evidence in The Discourse on Inequality shows that Rousseau believes that humans are happier in a natural state. He seems to view all societal forms as legitimized chains that would eventually lead to a despotic system of government in which men are in a state of war. Both authors share the view that the sustainability of a society political stability depend on whether or not its system of government is in accord with the law of nature. However, they present two opposing views on whether or not such sustainability is possible. Rousseau sees the presence of society as problematic regardless of the form of government in place whereas Montesquieu views the political authority of the right system of government as a necessity. Therefore we would first present Rousseau’s pejorative perspective on the institution of societies by pointing out its negative influence on natural liberty and equality before comparing it to Montesquieu’s arguments on the necessity of the presence of a monarchial system of government preferably. Rousseau presents