The normative social contract, which Rousseau argued in The Social Contract (1762), aims to respond to this sad situation and to remedy the social and moral dysfunctions caused by the development of society. The distinction between history and justification, between the expert situation of humanity and how it should live together, is of the utmost importance to Rousseau. We should not ignore history and ignore the causes of the problems we face, but we must solve them by our ability to decide how we should live. Maybe he never does it right, even if it`s like it did. Social Contract – an agreement between the people and the government in which citizens agree to be governed as long as the government protects their natural rights Quentin Skinner argued that several modern innovations critical in treaty theory are found in the writings of The Calvinists and The French Huguenots, whose work was invoked by writers in the Netherlands who opposed their submission to Spain and later by Catholics in England.  Francisco Suarez (1548-1617), of the Salamanca school, could be considered a former social contract theorist, who theorized natural law by trying to limit the divine right of absolute monarchy. All these groups have been led to articulate conceptions of popular sovereignty through a confederation or social treaty, and all these arguments began with proto-“State of Nature” arguments that the basis of the policy is that everyone is inherently free from submission to any government. The principles that people in the original position, behind the veil of ignorance, would choose to regulate a society at the most fundamental level (i.e. before a Constitution) are rightly called by Rawls the two principles of justice. These two principles determine the distribution of both civil liberties and social and economic goods. The first principle is that every human being in a society must have as much fundamental freedom as possible, as long as the same freedoms are granted to everyone. This means that there must be as much civil liberty as possible as long as these goods are distributed equally. (This would exclude, for example, a scenario in which there is a greater aggregate of civil liberties than in an alternative scenario, but where these freedoms have not been distributed equitably among citizens.) The second principle is that social and economic inequalities can be equitable, but they must be accessible to all in the same way (i.e.
no one should in principle be denied access to a greater economic advantage) and that these inequalities must be for the benefit of all. This means that economic inequalities are only justified if the least advantaged member of society is better off than in the case of alternative regulations. It is only if a rising tide actually carries all the boats up that economic inequalities can be tolerated in a just society. The method of the initial position supports this second principle, called the principle of difference, because if we are behind the veil of ignorance and therefore do not know what our situation will be in society, if the veil of ignorance is lifted, we will only accept principles that will be to our advantage, even if we find ourselves in the least favoured position in society. The desire to promote mutual relations and promote historical friendship between them; Agreement between the Government of the United States of America and the State Government of Israel on the application of their competition laws Virginia Hero argued that “contemporary Western society in the grip of contractual thought” (193).