As soon as one political society formed, it became necessary for other human beings to organize themselves similarly since such a society had the organizational capacity to prey upon less developed peoples. Soon, people thought of themselves as members of their national community, weakening any lingering notion of common humanity. States then fought wars with one another and subjected their citizens to even greater misery, as they kill and die by the thousands merely at the whim of their leaders. At this point, Rousseau’s historical progression essentially stops, and he turns to compare his depiction of social development against alternative explanations. The first alternative is the strong rule by right of conquest. Rousseau finds this absurd, as there can be no question of right when people have been forcibly subjugated. Furthermore, the concept of strength and weakness does not reflect any natural disparity but rather derives from wealth and poverty. It is absurd to think that the poor would consent to a condition that exacerbated their condition.

Early government in all likelihood lacked a clear distinction between rulers and ruled since there was nothing like an administrative body capable of enforcing an expansive set of laws. Government began with general rules and gradually expanded its power to address new concerns.