Locke and Rousseau 173Of course each of the three forms can become corrupt, and the
size of the state can contribute to this problem. As with most
philosophers, monarchy when corrupted, is the worst form. The
resulting tyranny is most easily effected in a large state, so he
opts for a small state, one in which the majority exercises
sovereignty directly. The problem is not, however, limited to
size. Obviously, the complexity of modem states compounds the
problem and must be taken into consideration if the favored
system is impractical.
Rousseau was a Romantic who placed considerably more
faith in feeling than in reason. He considered instincts pure, and
reason nothing more than clever manipulations for undermining
man’s natural goodness. Perhaps this is why his philosophy is
often confusing. He can be the great democrat, talking about the
general will being the product of an aware public voting on
issues according to the good of the community rather than
personal preference, and also account for the public’s being
deceived and call for a legislator and “interpreter” of the general
will— and thereby sow the seeds of totalitarianism. Throughout,
he seeks the moral supremacy of man unspoiled by progress,
technology, and most of all, rationalism.
It is interesting to note that in this modem age of technology,
complex and swiftly changing institutions, social alienation, and
the myriad of problems that face us, nationally and internation
ally, many harken back to Rousseau ’ s plea for a simpler life. The
conflict between the romantic and the realist is joined today, as
it was then. Can we go back? If not, can we save something from
that earlier simple and uncomplicated life and incorporate it into
the way we live today? Or is what exits the product of some vital
force in time, and must we look ahead to new means to attack
new problems?