When I think of government, the first type that comes to mind is a democratic government. I am most used to it because I live in, theoretically, a democratic society. So with that, my views are based on a democratic ideal. First, the reason I think people establish governments is so that they can work together as a whole to attain a better life. One where they would not need to worry about chaos and destruction.
             I would assume that if these individuals established a government, in order to have a civil state, they would want no one person, or few persons, to have complete control over them. The people wouldn't voluntarily give their lives to a rulers' ideals. Hopefully, they would all know that the best ideals are the ideals of all the people brought together, in an organized fashion, to form a consensus. In a representative government, this would be done by voting for a representative that holds beliefs close to those of the people he or she is representing.
             In reading Rousseau's selection, I have to agree with his idea that no single person would voluntarily allow his or her life to be the property of an another. That person just might as well save themselves from years of suffering and just commit suicide. In terms of government, citizens of a state would not give up all of their freedoms at the single command of the government's wishes. What's the point of searching for a better life if the government is taking complete control of how you do it? It defeats the ideals of human nature. Those that make us strive for that better life. People still feel the need to be an individual, even when they are a part of a huge government.
             Of course, in today's society, we give up some freedoms to have a voice in the consensus, such as killing someone at pure will. For example, here in the United States, when the Constitution was written, we agreed to abide by its laws, even as th
             ...