To gain a better purchase on what general will coordination is, it will be helpful to contrast it with a form of social interaction it appears to resemble: acting in solidarity. In our political culture, “solidarity” is often used imprecisely and in a variety of vaguely related senses. However, what follows focuses on only a very few legitimate uses of the term. An investigation of solidarity is useful especially for the insight it provides into the central political problem Rousseauean political philosophy confronts: the problem of transforming a world where private interests hold exclusive sway into a social order in which “the exercise of the general will” plays an important role.

A POINT OF DEPARTURE

It is seldom enlightening to investigate political phenomena by reflecting on obscure and oracular dicta. But, in this case, there is a venerable and celebrated saying that, though virtually featureless, suggests what is essential. According to the portion of the Mishnah called the Pirke Aboth, “The Sayings of the Fathers,” Rabbi Hillel is supposed to have said: “If I am not for myself, then who will be for me? And when I am for myself only, what am I?” These often quoted words are sufficiently vague to support a variety of plausible interpretations. They might be held, for instance, to assert the moral importance of self-respect.