All chapters

The Social Contract · Chapter

II: That Sovereignty Is Indivisible explained

Rousseau argues that sovereignty, like the general will, is indivisible.

What happens

Rousseau argues that sovereignty, like the general will, is indivisible. He criticizes political theorists who mistakenly divide sovereignty into separate powers (e.g., legislative and executive), comparing them to jugglers who dismember a child only to reassemble it. He asserts that such divisions are illusory; the rights taken as parts of sovereignty are actually subordinate emanations. He illustrates this with the example of declaring war and making peace, which are applications of law, not acts of sovereignty. Rousseau also critiques Grotius and Barbeyrac for their sophistry in serving monarchs rather than truth.

Themes in this chapter

  • Sovereignty and Government

    Rousseau emphasizes that sovereignty is indivisible and cannot be split into separate powers like legislative and executive.

  • The General Will

    Sovereignty is an act of the general will, which is either general or not; it cannot be divided.

  • Critique of Despotism and Slavery

    Rousseau criticizes Grotius and Barbeyrac for serving monarchs and robbing peoples of their rights.

Characters to notice

  • Jean-Jacques Rousseau

    Author who argues for the indivisibility of sovereignty and criticizes political theorists for dividing it.

  • Hugo Grotius

    Criticized for his sophistry in robbing peoples of rights to flatter Louis XIII.

  • Thomas Hobbes

    Implicitly referenced as a political theorist whose views on sovereignty are challenged by Rousseau's indivisibility argument.

  • John Locke

    Implicitly referenced as a theorist who might divide sovereignty, contrasting with Rousseau's indivisible view.

Key passages

  • Sovereignty, for the same reason as makes it inalienable, is indivisible; for will either is, or is not, general; it is the will either of the body of the people, or only of a part of it.

    Sovereignty cannot be divided because the general will is either the will of the whole people or just a part; it cannot be split.

    Rousseau's core argument for the indivisibility of sovereignty based on the nature of the general will.

  • Thus, for example, the acts of declaring war and making peace have been regarded as acts of Sovereignty; but this is not the case, as these acts do not constitute law, but merely the application of a law, a particular act which decides how the law applies.

    Declaring war or making peace are not acts of sovereignty; they are just applications of a law, not the law itself.

    Rousseau clarifies that certain governmental actions are subordinate to law, not part of sovereignty.

  • Grotius, a refugee in France, ill-content with his own country, and desirous of paying his court to Louis XIII, to whom his book is dedicated, spares no pains to rob the peoples of all their rights and invest kings with them by every conceivable artifice.

    Grotius, an exile in France, flattered King Louis XIII by stripping people of their rights and giving them to kings.

    Rousseau accuses Grotius of intellectual dishonesty to gain favor with monarchs.

The Social Contract — II: That Sovereignty Is Indivisible Explained