Social contract theory of the origin of the state.

Social Contract theory:

a). The most famous theory with regard to the origin of the state is the social contract theory. The theory goes to tell that the state came into existence out of a contract between the people and the sovereign at some point of time. According to this theory, there were two division in human history- one period is prior to the establishment of the state called the 'state of nature' and the other period is one subsequent to the foundation of the state called the 'Civil Society'.

b). There were three exponents of this theory. They were
i). Thomas Hobbes,
ii). John lockey and;
iii). Jean Jacques Rousseau.

c). The doctrine of social contract is faintly mentioned in the ancient period by both the Western and Indian philosopher. Plato was the first among the Western thinkers to use the term social contract.  it is also referred to in the  'Arthasastra' of Kautilya.

d). According to  the social contract theory the state was the creation of the people living in a state of nature which was a lawless and orderless system. The state of nature was controlled by unwritten laws prescribed not by men but by nature.

Thomas Hobbes(   Theory of the social contract Thomas):

a). Hobbes in his book 'leviathan Delineates' very precisely and straight forwardly described  the creation of state by an agreement to begin with, before the state was created, there was a state of nature in which a war was ragging.

b). The people became fed up with the state of nature. In order to get rid of the unbearable conditions they extract into an agreement by which they established a government or authority to which they surrendered all their rights. The surrender was unconditional and irrevocable.

c).  The authority was a single person or a group of persons endowed  with unlimited power. The people had no right to depose the ruler or to agitate against the ruler.

Locke's theory of social contract:

a). In his book 'Treatise on Cvil Government' John Locke justifying The limited monarchy of English type draw his own state of nature. He did not agree that the state of nature was a gloomy and dismal one as pointed by Thomas Hobbes. In contrast, Lock's state of nature was one of peace, reason and good will. Yet this semi-paradise could not satisfy the people because they pinning for law and impartial authority so they abandoned the state of nature though for a different reason.

b). In replacing the state of nature the people created the civil society by a contract. That done, they made another contract by which the government in the person of the king was set up. Here the ruler was a party to the contract. The people would obey him so long he would protect their life and property. So in Locke's theory there were two contracts, one for the creation of the civil society and the other for establishment of the government.

c). John Locke's view was that the individuals promised to accept the judgements of a common judge, when they agreed to the accord, which established civil society. The government, in its turn promised to execute its trust faithfully. It was agreed that in case the government broke the terms of the pact or  in other words if it violated the constitution, the people would have the right to rebel.

Rousseau's theory of social contract:

a). Jean-jacques Rousseau in his book 'social contract' published in 1762 recouncils the authority of the state and liberty of the individual. His state of nature had an overflow of idefllic  felicity. Their human lives were free, healthy, honest and happy. But there was debasement and degradation with the increase of population and with the progress of civilization particularly with the emergence of private property in land which destroyed the natural equality among men.

b). To get out of this menacing position man entered into an agreement with the pledges. Each of us puts  his own person and all his power in common under the supreme direction of the general will. And in our corporate capacity, we receive each member as an individual part of the whole. The authority created was not given to the ruler, but was returned by the whole community. The whole community expressed the general bill in a public meeting. Subsequently, the government was created by a legislative measure. The people delegated power to the government.  Rousseau's theory's hallmark is the "general bill".

c). General bill is the best in the bill of all. So the general bill must be filtered cream of the bill of all. Thus common interest or welfare interest of the people is the general will.

Critics of the theory:  The social contract theory is strongly denounced on the following grounds:

i). The theory is not borne out by any historical record. It is not known to history that any such contract was made.

ii). Contract is not the beginning of the society but the end of it. The universally accepted view is that the society has moved from status to contract and not vice versa. With the growth of age,  status lost its rigour of fixity and its place was taken by contractual obligations.

iii). The Other serious fault with the theory is that it presupposed political consciousness in the state of nature even prior to the establishment of the state. How can one have the idea of the good of a state when he has no experience of the state ?

iv). There cannot be any right even if it is a natural rights without the state. Rights follows from the womb of the state. Without an established civil society there cannot be any right. It does not follow from logic that the people had a bundle of rights even before the creation of the state.

v). The theory is dangerously wrong by certifying the state to be a handiwork of human beings. The error is that the state is never a creation of man but it is an independent social Institution. The truth is that the government, not the state, is the creation of man.

Value of the theory: Although as an explanation of the origin of the state the social contract theory is unacceptable. It has some merits or values, these are as following;

a). The theory dashed to the ground the more worthless theory that the state was the creation of the god.

b). There might not be any social contract anywhere in history but it carried the message of the Supremacy of the people in statecraft and gave encouragement to the growth of democracy and gave a deterrent to the arbitariness  of any government.

Conclusion:
                     As we read Hobbes, Locke and Rousseau we find three interpretation of the social contract.

a). According to Hobbes theory of contract is one in which The People unconditional surrender their rights to the monarch who is bound to become a despot.

b). In Locke's case the people conditionally delegate their power   to the king and make the ruler accountable to them. Thus Locke support the Limited monarchy in England.

c). Rousseau is most radical in enthroning the people and making the people and making the people themselves the rulers.

d). Hobbes stand for 'legal sovereignty', Locke supports 'political sovereignty' and Rousseau, 'popular sovereignty'.