Book One's Subject

Man is born free; and everywhere he is in chains. One thinks himself the master of others, and still remains a greater slave than they. How did this change come about? I do not know. What can make it legitimate? That question I think I can answer.

People are born free, yet everywhere they are in chains. Someone who thinks he is the master of others is still more enslaved than those he claims to rule. How did this change come about? I do not know. What can make this change legitimate? I think I can answer that question.

If I took into account only force, and the effects derived from it, I should say: "As long as a people is compelled to obey, and obeys, it does well; as soon as it can shake off the yoke, and shakes it off, it does still better; for, regaining its liberty by the same right as took it away, either it is justified in resuming it, or there was no justification for those who took it away." But the social order is a sacred right which is the basis of all other rights. Nevertheless, this right does not come from nature, and must therefore be founded on conventions. Before coming to that, I have to prove what I have just asserted.

If I considered only force and its effects, I would say: "As long as a people is forced to obey and does obey, it does well. As soon as the people can free themselves and do so, they do even better. For they regain their freedom by the same right used to take it away. Either they are justified in reclaiming their freedom, or those who took it away had no justification." But the social order is a sacred right that forms the basis of all other rights. Yet this right does not come from nature, so it must be based on agreements. Before discussing those agreements, I must prove what I have just claimed.