Introduction
This essay compares and contrasts key concepts from Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s Discourse on the Origin and Basis of Inequality Among Men (commonly referred to as the Second Discourse) and Mariarosa Dalla Costa and Selma James’s essay The Power of Women and the Subversion of the Community. Specifically, it examines Rousseau’s ideas on the emergence of social inequality through public esteem and the strategic invention of institutions by the wealthy, alongside Dalla Costa and James’s notions of the ‘social factory’ and the subversive potential of women’s resistance to unpaid domestic labour. These concepts are rooted in political thought and theory, addressing how societal structures perpetuate inequality and exploitation. The essay then applies these ideas to the specific political issue of the Israeli kibbutz, a communal system historically designed to promote equality but facing challenges in gender roles and economic organisation. By analysing these thinkers, the paper argues that while Rousseau highlights the psychological and institutional origins of inequality, Dalla Costa and James extend this to gendered capitalist reproduction, offering insights into how kibbutzim might address persistent inequalities. This structure allows for a critical evaluation of their relevance, drawing on a range of academic sources to support the discussion.
Rousseau’s Concepts of Inequality
Jean-Jacques Rousseau, in his Discourse on the Origin and Basis of Inequality Among Men (1755), presents a foundational critique of how inequality arises in human societies. A key concept is the attachment of value to public esteem, as Rousseau notes: “A value came to be attached to public esteem” (Rousseau, 1755, p. 3). He argues that as people begin living in proximity, constant comparison fosters a psychological need for recognition, leading to social ranking and inequality. This shift from natural equality in a state of nature to artificial hierarchies is not merely economic but deeply social; individuals seek validation through reputation, which Rousseau sees as a precursor to envy and division. This idea is significant because it illustrates how inequality begins psychologically, before solidifying into material disparities.
Furthermore, Rousseau describes the political origins of inequality as a calculated strategy by the wealthy: “The rich man… conceived at length the profoundest plan that ever entered the mind of man” (Rousseau, 1755, p. 6). Here, he posits that the invention of government and property institutions serves to protect the interests of the affluent, masquerading as justice but actually entrenching inequality. This concept underscores that political systems can be founded on self-interest rather than equity, a point that has influenced modern political theory by highlighting the manipulative potential of institutions (Cranston, 1984). Rousseau’s analysis is thus critical in understanding how social and political structures perpetuate divisions, though it has limitations, such as its somewhat romanticised view of pre-social humanity, which critics argue overlooks practical complexities (Dent, 1988).
In applying these ideas broadly, Rousseau suggests that addressing inequality requires a return to more egalitarian principles, perhaps through education or communal living that minimises competitive esteem. However, his framework is largely gender-neutral, focusing on class and status without explicit attention to women’s roles, which sets the stage for contrast with later feminist thinkers.
Dalla Costa and James’s Concepts of the Social Factory and Subversion
In contrast, Mariarosa Dalla Costa and Selma James, in their 1972 essay The Power of Women and the Subversion of the Community, extend Marxist analysis to the domestic sphere, introducing the concept of the ‘social factory’. They argue that capitalism permeates beyond traditional workplaces into homes and communities: “The Social Factory” (Dalla Costa and James, 1972, p. 3). Women’s unpaid housework, they contend, is essential for reproducing labour power—maintaining workers and raising future generations—thus making the home a site of capitalist production. This idea challenges conventional views by revealing how gender roles sustain economic exploitation, with women subsidising capitalism through invisible labour (Federici, 2012). It matters because it reframes inequality as not just class-based but inherently gendered, broadening the scope of political resistance.
Building on this, the authors discuss the “Subversion of the Community”, positing that women’s resistance to domestic expectations can disrupt the capitalist system. By refusing unpaid labour, women challenge the reproduction of labour power, potentially leading to broader societal upheaval. This subversive potential is empowering, as it positions women as agents of change rather than passive victims (Weeks, 2011). Dalla Costa and James’s work is informed by autonomist Marxism and second-wave feminism, emphasising collective action, though it has been critiqued for underemphasising intersectional factors like race (James, 2012).
Their concepts differ from Rousseau’s by incorporating a materialist, gendered lens, focusing on everyday reproduction rather than abstract psychological origins. Nonetheless, both highlight how systemic structures maintain inequality, inviting comparison in their application to real-world issues.
Comparison and Contrast of the Concepts
Comparing Rousseau’s ideas with those of Dalla Costa and James reveals shared themes in critiquing inequality’s origins and perpetuation. Both identify structural mechanisms: Rousseau through psychological comparison and institutional manipulation, and Dalla Costa and James via the extension of capitalism into private life. For instance, Rousseau’s notion of public esteem parallels the social factory in showing how non-economic factors—like reputation or domestic roles—underpin exploitation. Indeed, both frameworks argue that inequality is not natural but socially constructed, with Rousseau tracing it to early societal formation and Dalla Costa and James to capitalist reproduction (Cranston, 1984; Federici, 2012). This commonality underscores a critical approach in political theory, where awareness of these dynamics can inform resistance.
However, contrasts are evident in scope and focus. Rousseau’s analysis is primarily historical and philosophical, emphasising individual psychology and elite strategies, whereas Dalla Costa and James offer a contemporary, feminist-economic perspective, centring women’s labour as a linchpin of systemic inequality. Rousseau’s gender-neutral stance arguably overlooks the domestic exploitation that Dalla Costa and James foreground, potentially limiting its applicability to gendered issues (Dent, 1988; Weeks, 2011). Furthermore, while Rousseau sees inequality as originating from social proximity, Dalla Costa and James view it as an ongoing process embedded in capitalism, suggesting more immediate subversive strategies. These differences highlight evolving political thought: Rousseau provides a broad foundation, but Dalla Costa and James add depth by addressing overlooked intersections of gender and economy. Evaluating these perspectives, one might argue that Dalla Costa and James’s approach is more actionable for modern contexts, though Rousseau’s emphasis on esteem remains relevant to understanding persistent social hierarchies.
Application to the Israeli Kibbutz
The Israeli kibbutz, established in the early 20th century as socialist communes promoting collective ownership and equality, serves as a practical case for applying these concepts. Historically, kibbutzim aimed to eliminate inequality through shared labour and resources, yet they have grappled with gender divisions and economic shifts (Near, 1992). Rousseau would likely view the kibbutz as an attempt to counteract the psychological origins of inequality by fostering communal living that minimises public esteem and competitive ranking. For example, the emphasis on collective decision-making could mitigate the “value attached to public esteem” by prioritising group welfare over individual reputation (Rousseau, 1755). Regarding institutional origins, Rousseau might critique any privatisation trends in kibbutzim—such as the shift towards individual salaries in the 1980s—as echoing the rich man’s “profoundest plan” to entrench inequality through self-serving structures (Talmon, 1972). Thus, he would advocate reinforcing egalitarian institutions to prevent such regressions, though his ideas might not fully address gendered dynamics.
In contrast, Dalla Costa and James would apply the social factory concept to highlight how, despite ideals of gender equality, women’s roles in kibbutzim often reproduced capitalist-like exploitation through communal childcare and domestic tasks. Early kibbutzim sought to liberate women by collectivising housework, but studies show persistent gender imbalances, with women disproportionately handling reproductive labour (Fogiel-Bijaoui, 2010). This aligns with the social factory, where the community becomes an extension of production, maintaining labour power without formal wages. For subversion, they might argue that women’s organised resistance—such as strikes against unequal task allocation—could disrupt the kibbutz’s reproductive system, challenging its foundations and promoting true equality (Dalla Costa and James, 1972). However, limitations exist; kibbutzim’s evolution towards privatisation has arguably diluted subversive potential, integrating them into broader capitalist structures (Near, 1992).
Overall, Rousseau’s framework addresses psychological and institutional equality in kibbutzim, while Dalla Costa and James focus on gendered subversion, together offering a comprehensive approach to resolving inequalities.
Conclusion
In summary, Rousseau’s concepts of public esteem and institutional manipulation contrast with Dalla Costa and James’s social factory and subversion by emphasising psychological versus gendered-economic origins of inequality, yet both critique systemic perpetuation. Applied to the Israeli kibbutz, Rousseau highlights communal structures to combat esteem-driven divisions, while Dalla Costa and James underscore resistance to domestic exploitation. These ideas reveal the kibbutz’s strengths and limitations in achieving equality, with implications for political theory: integrating psychological and feminist perspectives could enhance egalitarian models. Further research might explore how contemporary kibbutzim adapt these insights amid globalisation, though this essay demonstrates their enduring relevance.
References
- Cranston, M. (1984) ‘Introduction’, in J.J. Rousseau, A Discourse on Inequality. Penguin Classics.
- Dalla Costa, M. and James, S. (1972) The Power of Women and the Subversion of the Community. Falling Wall Press.
- Dent, N.J.H. (1988) Rousseau: An Introduction to His Psychological, Social and Political Theory. Basil Blackwell.
- Federici, S. (2012) Revolution at Point Zero: Housework, Reproduction, and Feminist Struggle. PM Press.
- Fogiel-Bijaoui, S. (2010) ‘The Spousal Pact: Marital Agreements in the Israeli Kibbutz’, Israel Studies, 15(3), pp. 147-163.
- James, S. (2012) Sex, Race and Class—The Perspective of Winning: A Selection of Writings 1952-2011. PM Press.
- Near, H. (1992) The Kibbutz Movement: A History, Volume 1: Origins and Growth, 1909-1939. Oxford University Press.
- Rousseau, J.J. (1755) Discourse on the Origin and Basis of Inequality Among Men. Translated by G.D.H. Cole. Liberty Fund.
- Talmon, Y. (1972) Family and Community in the Kibbutz. Harvard University Press.
- Weeks, K. (2011) The Problem with Work: Feminism, Marxism, Antiwork Politics, and Postwork Imaginaries. Duke University Press.
