The evolution of the rule of law from the perspective of Thomas Hobbes and Jean-Jacques Rousseau

In the new age, there are two views on the rule of law, which is one of the most fundamental principles of modern governance; Hobbesian approach to the rule of law and the Russian approach, in which both approaches share the idea of ​​a social contract. Hobbes considered the ruler of the pyramid of society, the ruler, to be the basis of law, and intended unlimited power for the governing body, which was given to him by the first agreement between the people and the ruler. There is no power. In another plan of the rule of law, which derives from Rousseau's philosophical point of view, the public will is the source of law and in a higher position than the ruler. This idea became the basis for extensive changes in the relationship between government and citizens in the new era, which was reflected in the French Revolution. During the 19th and 20th centuries, with all the changes that took place in legal discourse, the importance of this Russian view of the rule of law as the basis for real democracy rather than formal democracy increased. Therefore, in this article, we have tried to compare these two approaches to the rule of law and show the innovative aspects of Rousseau's social contract. This descriptive-analytical research is an introduction to the broader and deeper research in the political thought of these two prominent theorists in the modern world, with an emphasis on the evolution of the concept and basis of the rule of law in the new era.