Key Arguments

• Rousseau begins with a general maxim: 'Simple government is better in itself, just because it is simple,' valuing institutional simplicity as such.
• He identifies a structural defect: 'when the executive power is not sufficiently dependent upon the legislative power, i. e. when the prince is more closely related to the Sovereign than the people to the prince,' meaning the executive is too strong or too near the sovereign relative to the people.
• He argues that in such a case 'this lack of proportion must be cured by the division of the government,' so that the excessive strength of the executive is checked by dividing its powers.
• He notes that, under such a division, 'all the parts have then no less authority over the subjects, while their division makes them all together less strong against the Sovereign,' so the people remain equally governed, but the executive becomes weaker in relation to the sovereign body.
• He offers an alternative technique: 'The same disadvantage is also prevented by the appointment of intermediate magistrates, who leave the government entire, and have the effect only of balancing the two powers and maintaining their respective rights,' suggesting that inserting intermediaries can moderate power without fragmenting the executive.
• He insists that in this second case 'Government is then not mixed, but moderated,' distinguishing between a true mixture of different governments and a simple moderation of a single form through internal arrangements.

Source Quotes

This last form is bad; for it secures no unity in the government, and the State is left without a bond of union. Is a simple or a mixed government the better? Political writers are always debating the question, which must be answered as we have already answered a question about all forms of government. Simple government is better in itself, just because it is simple.

Political writers are always debating the question, which must be answered as we have already answered a question about all forms of government. Simple government is better in itself, just because it is simple. But when the executive power is not sufficiently dependent upon the legislative power, i. e. when the prince is more closely related to the Sovereign than the people to the prince, this lack of proportion must be cured by the division of the government; for all the parts have then no less authority over the subjects, while their division makes them all together less strong against the Sovereign.

Simple government is better in itself, just because it is simple. But when the executive power is not sufficiently dependent upon the legislative power, i. e. when the prince is more closely related to the Sovereign than the people to the prince, this lack of proportion must be cured by the division of the government; for all the parts have then no less authority over the subjects, while their division makes them all together less strong against the Sovereign. The same disadvantage is also prevented by the appointment of intermediate magistrates, who leave the government entire, and have the effect only of balancing the two powers and maintaining their respective rights.

But when the executive power is not sufficiently dependent upon the legislative power, i. e. when the prince is more closely related to the Sovereign than the people to the prince, this lack of proportion must be cured by the division of the government; for all the parts have then no less authority over the subjects, while their division makes them all together less strong against the Sovereign. The same disadvantage is also prevented by the appointment of intermediate magistrates, who leave the government entire, and have the effect only of balancing the two powers and maintaining their respective rights. Government is then not mixed, but moderated. The opposite disadvantages may be similarly cured, and, when the government is too lax, tribunals may be set up to concentrate it.

Key Concepts

• Is a simple or a mixed government the better? Political writers are always debating the question, which must be answered as we have already answered a question about all forms of government.
• Simple government is better in itself, just because it is simple.
• But when the executive power is not sufficiently dependent upon the legislative power, i. e. when the prince is more closely related to the Sovereign than the people to the prince, this lack of proportion must be cured by the division of the government;
• for all the parts have then no less authority over the subjects, while their division makes them all together less strong against the Sovereign.
• The same disadvantage is also prevented by the appointment of intermediate magistrates, who leave the government entire, and have the effect only of balancing the two powers and maintaining their respective rights. Government is then not mixed, but moderated.

Context

Middle of Book III, Chapter VII, where Rousseau compares simple and mixed governments and explains how an overly independent executive can be corrected either by dividing the government or by inserting balancing magistracies, leading to what he calls a 'moderated' rather than mixed government.