Social Contract Theory

Social Contract Theory is the view that persons’ moral and/or political obligations are dependent upon a contract or agreement among them to form the society in which they live. It provides a justificatory framework for the legitimacy of state authority. Instead of appealing to divine right or natural hierarchies, social contract theorists argue that political power is only legitimate if it is based on the consent of the governed.

The “contract” is often a hypothetical one—a thought experiment used to determine what rational individuals would agree to if they were starting from scratch. Key figures in this tradition include Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, and in the 20th century, John Rawls.

Thomas Hobbes: The Contract of Security

In Leviathan (1651), Hobbes presents a dark view of human nature. He describes the “State of Nature”—a condition without government—as a “war of all against all” where life is “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.”

To escape this chaos, Hobbes argues that rational individuals would agree to surrender almost all of their rights to an absolute sovereign (the “Leviathan”). In exchange, the sovereign provides order and protection. For Hobbes, the social contract is a one-way street: once you enter it to save your life, you have very little right to rebel, as any government is better than the anarchy of the state of nature.

John Locke: The Contract of Liberty

John Locke’s Second Treatise of Government (1689) takes a more optimistic view. For Locke, the state of nature is not necessarily a state of war, but it is “inconvenient” because there is no impartial judge to settle disputes over property.

Locke argues that individuals have “natural rights” to life, liberty, and property that exist prior to the state. The social contract is entered into specifically to protect these rights. Unlike Hobbes’s absolute sovereign, Locke’s government is limited and conditional. If a government fails to protect the natural rights of its citizens, the “contract” is broken, and the people have a right—and sometimes a duty—to overthrow the government. This philosophy was a primary influence on the American Declaration of Independence.

Jean-Jacques Rousseau: The General Will

In The Social Contract (1762), Rousseau famously wrote, “Man is born free, and everywhere he is in chains.” He sought a way for people to live in society without losing their freedom.

Rousseau’s solution was the “General Will.” He argued that by giving ourselves up to the community as a whole, we aren’t submitting to a master, but to ourselves as a collective body. In a true democracy, the laws represent the collective interest, and by obeying the law, we are essentially obeying our own higher reason. For Rousseau, the contract is about moving from “natural liberty” (the freedom to do whatever you want) to “civil liberty” (the freedom to live under laws you gave yourself).

John Rawls: The Veil of Ignorance

In the 20th century, John Rawls revitalized social contract theory with A Theory of Justice (1971). He introduced the “Original Position,” a hypothetical situation where people decide on the principles of justice for their society while behind a “Veil of Ignorance.”

Behind this veil, you don’t know your race, class, gender, talents, or even your personal goals. Rawls argues that rational people in this position would choose two principles:

The Liberty Principle: Maximum equal basic liberties for all.
The Difference Principle: Social and economic inequalities are permitted only if they benefit the least advantaged members of society.

While influential, the social contract has faced significant criticism:

The Problem of Actual Consent: Critics point out that almost no one has actually signed such a contract. If consent is the basis of legitimacy, most governments are illegitimate. Theorists respond with ideas of “tacit consent” (by using roads or receiving protection, you agree to obey), though this is also debated.
Exclusionary Nature: Feminists (like Carole Pateman) and Race Theorists (like Charles Mills) argue that historical social contracts were actually “sexual contracts” or “racial contracts” designed to exclude women and non-white people from the status of full “contracting individuals.”
The Myth of the Individual: Some argue that it is a mistake to view individuals as existing “prior” to society. Humans are inherently social, and the idea of an isolated individual choosing to join a group is a biological and historical fiction.

Conclusion

Social Contract Theory transformed the way we think about political legitimacy. By shifting the focus from “top-down” authority to “bottom-up” consent, it laid the groundwork for modern constitutional democracy. Whether through the lens of Hobbesian security, Lockean liberty, or Rawlsian justice, the idea of the “deal” between the state and the citizen remains the cornerstone of political philosophy.