Like many other thinkers of the modern age, Russian was a supporter of the social contract theory. According to this theory, human beings live in society because we have made a pact, an agreement. We live with others. We live together because we have decided to do so. To understand the importance of the social contract theory, it is important that you compare it with what Aristotle thought about society. As you will remember, for Aristotle, human society is natural, it is part of what we are, spontaneously and naturally, it is not the product of an agreement. However, modern philosophers believe that thinking about the social contract can help us better understand what society is and that is why they consider that society is a convention, it is something artificial, created by human beings. How the social contract theory works: We have to imagine what life would be like before we lived in society, when people lived isolated in a state of nature. Then we have to imagine what kind of pact these people in a natural state would be willing to make to have the advantages that living together with others provides us. This is how modern philosophers thought. We will be able to better understand what society is based on. What are the assumptions? tacit in which our coexistence is based that is called the social contract different philosophers imagine the social contract in different ways it all depends on how it is raised in human nature how they imagine the human being is deep down for Russo the human being deep down is good free and happy in the state of nature in its primitive state the human being is completely free and at the same time is good by nature however the society in which we currently live has made us bad it has corrupted us in such a way that Russo's political project consists of imagining what a suitable correct social contract should be like that allows to develop in human beings that freedom and that happiness and natural goodness that we all have inside but that the current social system does not allow to develop what would a well-made social contract be like then the question is how to say what type of pact do I have to make with others to have the advantages of living in society without losing all that good that I had in my natural state without losing my freedom or believes that the only possible answer to this great question is to imagine that each individual gives up his freedom and his power but not to a specific person but to the set of all people to the people if I access my freedom and give it to just one if all of us have our freedom and we give it to just one that one becomes the sovereign and has all the power this is just the way in which the social contract was imagined but this says Russian has a serious problem and it is that this sovereign has acquired so much power that he can become a tyrant the people stop being free they have given up power to another who is now the one who dominates them as Russian intended that the social contract maintain the freedom that we have in a natural state he proposes that we give up our freedom and our power but that we do it to the collective to the people in its entirety so that the one who would be the sovereign would be the people that is why Russian believes that the best political system would be democracy that is to say the system of the people have the power but this democracy has to be a direct democracy that is to say a democracy where everyone can participate immediately giving their opinion participating and voting furthermore Russo believes that the people are the sovereign because they have a mission which is to carry out the general will which is the general will the general will is the will of the people understood as a collective subject, that is to say as a great character that has his own desires and interests when the entire community is politically deciding what we should do, people can act in two different ways we can think about the common good we can make our decisions thinking about what benefits the people as a whole then we are looking for the general will and that is what makes decisions legitimate according to Russo however it can also happen that each person when they vote and when they decide in that democratic assembly is really thinking about their particular interests imagine that we all do the same thing that each person votes thinking about their particular interest and not in the interest of the people as a whole in that case says Russo even if everyone agrees that will is not the general will it is a selfish interested will it is a sum of individual wills the will of all is not the same as the general will the general will is the desires of the people when they set their sights on the common good understanding the people as a collective subject and that is what gives legitimacy to the decisions made by the assembly the popular will is sovereign according to Russo and it is also because its will is indivisible and inalienable that is indivisible means that the will of the people cannot be divided we cannot divide the will of the people that is why Russo is against Montesquieu's idea of separating the three branches of power the executive the legislative and the judicial because Russo believes that the will of the people is indivisible because it is unique and at the same time he believes that it is inalienable this means that it cannot be given or transferred to anyone the people cannot transmit their will to any person what they can do is entrust someone a representative to be in charge of executing the general will but that will be a mandate that is to say someone who has the mission to carry out the general will will not be the one who has the power the power the general will must continue to have it that is why Russo says that if a country is very large and in it it is not possible to carry out a political system that is based on direct democracy which would be desirable perhaps it could be good to have a monarchy but that monarchy be very careful it is not an absolute monarchy but it is the monarchy where the king is a representative someone in charge of the people to carry out the general will that the assembly that popular community entrusts him if he does not do so the sovereign will be illegitimate and can be deposed and replaced by another who does the general will