The problem is to find a from of association which will defend and protect with the whole common force the person and goods of each associate, and in which each, while uniting himself with all, may still obey himself alone, and remain as free as before. This is the fundamental problem of which the Social Contract provides the solution.
The clauses of this contract ... properly understood, may be reduced to one-the total alienation of each associate,together with all his rights, to the whole community; for, in the first place, as each gives himself absolutely, the conditions are the same for all; and, this being so, no one has any interest in making them burdensome to others.
moreover, the alienation being without reserve, the union is as perfect as it can be, and no associate has anything more to
demand: for, if the individuals retained certain rights, as there would be no common superior to decide between them and the public, each, being on one point his own judge, would ask to be so on all; the state of nature would thus continue, and the association would necessarily become inoperative or tyrannical.
finally, each man, in giving himself to all, gives himself to nobody; and as there is no associate over which he does not acquire the same right as he yields others over himself, he gains an equivalent for everything he loses, and an increase of force for the preservation of what he has.
if then we discard from the social compact what is not of its essence, we shall find that it reduces itself to the following terms:
"each of us puts his person and all his power in common under the supreme direction of the general will, and, in our corporate capacity, we receive each member as an indivisible part of the whole."
at once, in the place of the individual personality of each contracting party, this act of association creates a moral and collective body, composed of as many member as the assembly contain voters, and receiving from this act its unity, its common identity, its life, and its will. this public person, so formed by the union of all other person, formerly took the name of city, and now takes that of Republic or body politic; it is called by its member state when passive, Sovereign when active, and power when compared with others like itself. those who are associated in the take collectively the name of people. and severally are called citizens, as sharing in the sovereign power, and subjects, as being under the laws of the state
.. The act of association comprises a mutual undertaking between the public and the individual, and each individual,in making a contract, as we may say, with himself , is bound in a double capacity; as a member of the Sovereign he is bound to the individuals, and as a member of the state to the Sovereign but the maxim of civil right, that no one is bound by undertaking mad to himself, does not apply in this case; for there is a great difference between incurring one to whole for which you form a part.
..The body politic or the Sovereign, drawing its being wholly from the sanctity of the contract, can never bind itself, even to an outsider, to do anything derogatory to the original act, for instance, to alienate any part of itself, or to submit to