I would assume that if these individuals established a government, in order to have a civil state, they would want no one person, or few persons, to have complete control over them. The people wouldn't voluntarily give their lives to a rulers' ideals. Hopefully, they would all know that the best ideals are the ideals of all the people brought together, in an organized fashion, to form a consensus. In a representative government,

In reading Rousseau's selection, I have to agree with his idea that no single person would voluntarily allow his or her life to be the property of an another. That person just might as well save themselves from years of suffering and just commit suicide. In terms of government, citizens of a state would not give up all of their freedoms at the single command of the government's wishes. What's the point of searching for a better life if the government is taking complete control of how you do it? It defeats the ideals of human nature. Those that make us strive for that better life. People still feel the need to be an individual, even when they are a part of a huge government.

We live in this world as the only beings that can rationalize logically. I believe that freedom is one of those human nature elements. I think that being a slave would only make

Some common words found in the essay are:
, United Constitution, human nature, prohibition alcohol, life property, complete control, representative government,
Approximate Word count = 582
Approximate Pages = 2 (250 words per page double spaced)