in any case, the goal by which Rousseau’s treatise and the positions on which it is based are spiritualized (sovereignty of the people, freedom and equality of the individual, see G.. G. St. GU) does not at all reveal a desire to enslave the individual, but, on the contrary, to keep him free. Even when denying an individual religious freedom. Rousseau fears the anti-social nature of religion, which he considers to be the essence of religion, and therefore designs his own civil religion. The basis here is also: to create the unity of the political personality. - If it was pointed out that Rousseau’s treatise, among other things, had an influence on the terror of the Convention, then this gave rise to a fair objection: should holding Rousseau responsible for the excesses and violence of the revolution, isn’t it the same thing to blame the Gospel for the Night of Bareolomew?
Thus, speaking about the meaning of Copycat 01a], it seems to us, it is necessary to highlight the problem itself; formulated by Rousseau, his initial assumptions and finally the solution given by him. The setting may be extremely typical for a well-known political movement, and the original principles are introduced into a logical and paradoxical brilliant form, which has a charming effect on the minds.
which his contemporaries did not rise to, could not meet such a critical attitude as the ideas of political freedom and the “equality of the individual” that he proclaimed and uniquely introduced into the system of individualism met with admiration. Already from the very formulation of Rousseau’s political-individualist problem, it is clear that he placed the realization of the idea of freedom in close connection with the form of political association. We also see - if we understood Rousseau's theory 1) - what concrete expression the author of the social contract gave to this connection, on the basis of the integrity and unity of the citizen's personality.
The revolutionary doctrine (1789-1795) adopted the teachings of Montesquieu and Rousseau and took advantage of both the separation of civil and political freedom established by Montesquieu, and the concept of a free and equal citizen, combining political and civil freedom (the latter within the limits limited by him). The figures and doctrinaires of the French Revolution understood and already clearly expressed the connection that exists between individual al rights, which they called the rights of a citizen and a person and between the constitution or fundamental laws.
And since Rousseau proclaimed, with his characteristic rationalism, that the laws of reason are equal to the laws of nature, and Montesquieu, despite all his historicism, also believed that positive laws are only the application of general reason *), then it is natural that the truths recognized by the general reason - which among the Anglo-Americans is called common sense 3) - truths that are common to all humanity are placed in the head of the revolutionary French doctrine, and its foundation before the constitution itself.
T) See also G. Ts, sV. TU (end), to substantiate this understanding.
2) Not to mention the other writers of this era, who developed the same ideas. '
The understanding of common sense is also found in Descartes. See the chapter on the French philosopher.
And such truths are all the same: freedom and equality or equality of the individual, i.e., ideas of an individualistic nature. But, along with these theoretical considerations, historical and historical-philosophical motives were at work.
The individualistic principles of the French revolutionary doctrine, as it was expressed in three consequent declarations of the rights of man and citizen *), were placed in the body of the constitution and also under the authority of the Anglo-American charters and declarations proclaimed in some states of North America, which received spread the ideas of Puritanism and independence. These were states founded by religious sectarians who emigrated from England.