PUB2601 EXAM 1 REVIEW 2022.

PUB2601 EXAM 1 REVIEW 2022. What do the John Locke and Thomas Hobbes theories of the social contract have in common and how do they apply in South Africa? 1.1 The social contract The idea of the social contract developed in Western thought as a means of conceptualising the constitution of society: that is, the organisation of people into a legitimate polis. For Thomas Hobbes – broadly recognised as the first theorist to compose a full defence of social contract theory – the social contract named a rational agreement between self-interested individuals to submit to a central authority: the sovereign. This sovereign power would enforce a common law, affording rights and bestowing certain duties upon its citizens. The social contract arose decisively from what Hobbes termed a State of Nature – a hypothetical presocial and pre-political condition where individuals pursued their prerogatives to the point of violence, destruction and utter immorality. This ‘State of Nature’ is the essential precondition which makes necessary the social contract. In short, without a warlike State of Nature there would be no rational need for a social contract. This is Hobbes’s theory of the justification of the state. 1.2 Comparison The social contract, as theorized by Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau, is an agreement between citizens to form an organized society which relies on the right to secure mutual protection and security. This agreement legitimizes the authority of national governments over certain aspects of citizen’s lives, but also relates to other overarching institutions such as the African Union. A key condition of a functioning social contract is that citizens partially surrender their individual rights and adhere to said contract to maintain social order. This social order allows individuals to obtain prosperity, one that is possible with others rather than alone. Furthermore, security refers both to physical security as well as identity security. When a government can successfully provide both prosperity and security to a citizen, the social contract is fulfilled. This is highlighted in the Preamble to the 1996 South African Constitution 1.3 The social contract in South Africa within South Africa When the South African Constitution was adopted in 1996, it was imagined to represent a new social contract between all the people of South Africa. In this context, the term ‘social contract’ can be broadly understood as referring to an implicit agreement between the people to establish a new South African society, founded on the values of universal suffrage, equality, inclusivity, and democracy, designed to benefit all. The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa (Act 108 of 1996) stands as a symbol of the post-apartheid social contract (National Planning Commission (NPC) 2015). As a social contract, South Africa’s constitution is widely considered to be progressive. Firstly, it enshrines an expansive bill of rights, including civil and political rights, socio-economic rights – such as the right to social security, water, sanitation, and food – and a fundamental right to human dignity. Moreover, the South African This study source was downloaded by from CourseH on :17:39 GMT -05:00 constitution binds both the public and private sectors in its application. Section 8 of the constitution provides that the Bill of Rights (set out in Chapter 2) binds not only all organs of state, but further that: 8. (2) A provision of the Bill of Rights binds a natural or a juristic person if, and to the extent that, it is applicable, taking into account the nature of the right and the nature of any duty imposed by the right. This clause has been broadly interpreted to stand for the way in which the South African constitution, and, indeed, social contract, specifically encompasses the private sector and businesses. 2. How is Rossouw’s view of the social contract applied by communities? Prior to the Social Contract, the life in the State of Nature was happy and there was equality among men. As time passed, however, humanity faced certain changes. As the overall population increased, the means by which people could satisfy their needs had to change. People slowly began to live together in small families, and then in small communities. Divisions of labour were introduced, both within and between families, and discoveries and inventions made life easier, giving rise to leisure time. Such leisure time inevitably led people to make comparisons between themselves and others, resulting in public values, leading to shame and envy, pride and contempt. Most importantly however, according to Rousseau, was the invention of private property, which constituted the pivotal moment in humanity’s evolution out of a simple, pure state into one, characterized by greed, competition, vanity, inequality, and vice. The essence of the Rousseau’s theory of General Will is that State and Law were the product of General Will of the people. State and the Laws are made by it and if the government and laws do not conform to general will, they would be discarded. While the individual parts with his natural rights, in return he gets civil liberties such as freedom of speech, equality, assembly, etc. The General Will, therefore, for all purposes, was the will of majority citizens to which blind obedience was to be given. The majority was accepted on the belief that majority view is right than minority view. Each individual is not subject to any other individual but to the general will and to obey this is to obey himself. His sovereignty is infallible, indivisible, unpresentable and illimitable. Thus, Rousseau favoured people’s sovereignty. His natural law theory is confined to the freedom and liberty of the individual. For him, State, law, sovereignty, general will, etc. are interchangeable terms. Rousseau’s theory inspired French and American revolutions and given impetus to nationalism. He based his theory of social contract on the principle of “Man is born free, but everywhere he is in chains”. 3. How is Immanuel Kant’s view of the social contract applied by government?