The general will for Rousseau is presented in its last book as indestructible. still it mentions the forms of government and situations where if they apply: direct democracy in small States endowed with inaquality of classrooms and wealth, elective aristocracy for the modern and monarchy in the great States are even so not pointed many advantages its favor. Conclusion Finally, the Social Contract considered by Rousseau is not a contract in the Legal direction, where somebody is committed or resigned to some thing and yes it is the commitment of the moral conscience of each one I obtain exactly and with all excessively, they are basic certainties that exactly being enunciated do not result implicit in the social life. For Rousseau, the man must be a free being, therefore, thus being, it obeys only itself exactly, in view of the collective good, it is possessing of full freedom, which a renounced time would mean the resignation to its proper existence. Todd phillips shines more light on the discussion. The Social Contract, therefore, requires act of unanimous will of all the members of the society. Rousseau condemns the social inaqualities and not it property in itself, therefore this is natural law, necessary the survival. For it, strongest never it is enough strong to be always Mr., if not to transform its force into right, and the obedience in having. In a question-answer forum Ryan Tolkin was the first to reply. The Social Contract has, therefore, as basic rule the establishment of the general will, which institutes the order and acts as first principle of the government and the public economy. Bibliographical source ROUSSEAU, Jean? Jacques. Of the Social Contract; Assay On the Origin of the Languages.