Does Electing Representatives Entails Loss of Freedom?

Representation and Freedom
Student
Institution
Course
Professor
Date
Representation and Freedom
Why does Rousseau think that citizens who rely on representatives surrender their freedom?
Rousseau thinks that citizens who rely on representatives surrender their freedom because such a system lapses the people's sovereignty. Notably, the author brings forth the notion that individuality is one of the foundations of human dignity. Without the right of people to lead lives as they deed best for them, they become either enslaved people or equal to animals, who do not have the intellectual capacity to accomplish as many humans. Therefore, Rousseau believes that the reservation of this dignity largely depends on the ability of the people to demand what they believe is just and according to their best interest. As a result, it is an oxymoron for citizens to give the right to one individual and claim that they live in a sovereign nation. Rousseau does not believe that it is logical, in times of civilized organization and saving time, for people to leave the role of decision-making to one individual. According to Rousseau, the legitimacy of the sovereignty of a nation is a product of assembling the sovereign state of the citizens. As such, a state without the people's sovereignty cannot become sovereign in its entirety. In support of the supposition, Rousseau (2017) states that “the moment the populace is legitimately assembled as a sovereign body, the jurisdiction of the government wholly lapses, the executive power is suspended, and the person of a citizen at the bottom of the social heap is a sacred and inviolable as that of the first magistrate; because representatives no longer exist.” The sentiment infers that people cannot delegate their right to decide about issues that concern them. The liberty that they exhibit and enjoy results from their ability to make decisions on matters that affect them. Therefore, when people give representatives the authority to make decisions about a state, they surrender their freedom. Rousseau's idea appears logical and of conspicuous concern since there is the possibility of representatives becoming unresponsive. For instance, Peters and Arnesen (2018) inform that there are numerous cases when people question the legitimacy of their representatives because they are not giving what citizens want. In such cases, the people lack the freedom to demand their wants and needs from their representatives since the ones representing them have, most likely, passed laws prohibiting people from correcting/holding them accountable.
Furthermore, Rousseau believes that appointing or electing representatives is an act that takes away the freedom of the people because the action results in a lack of participation of the people in matters concerning public service. Although the people are the source of the wealth used in the provision of public services, the presence of representatives makes it impossible for the people to access the services without the permission of those representing them. The situation informs that citizens cannot do as they please even though they have a genuine and justifiable need for public goods and services. In other words, Rousseau worries that electing representatives is giving away the wealth of the state (or any other territory under the representation) to the few elected or appointed individuals. Thus, the people no longer have the freedom to access basic human needs such as information, education, movement, nutrition, and healthcare/medication. For this reason, Rousseau supposes that as soon as the people start to be represented, they lose the right to benefit from the laws and outcome of nature freely. On the contrary, people have to purchase what they should access and use without payment. Ultimately, the liberty that stems from citizens exploring the world and learning about the ways and mystery of the universe ceases. The freedom lapses because the people become enslaved. They have to concentrate on working to earn a living. In other words, they become slaves to the representatives; while they work, they pay the representatives through taxes and other public privileges granted to occupants of public offices.
According to Rousseau (2017), representation is "slave talk." It is a way that citizens enslave themselves for the benefit of the representatives. The perception holds water, considering that representatives may have agendas that counter the interests and wellbeing of the people. Historical accounts of slavery and male chauvinism in the United States indicate that the legislators use the authorities to make decisions to over-exploit those considered minorities or inferior to white males. For instance, the National Archives recounts that Hous...