  Rehberg saw the chief inspiration for French radicalism in the seductive and paradoxical writings of Jean Jacques Rousseau (6, 21). It was Rousseau who first advanced the principle of the autonomy of reason, and who made reason alone the touchstone of political legitimacy.  His doctrine of the general will meant that every political principle should be tested in the light of reason, or according to what an ideally rational person would will.  Rehberg found irresolvable ambiguities in Rousseau's doctrine, which, he claimed, made its application to the political world impossible. Rousseau's distinction between the general will and the will of all made it clear that it was not possible to determine the general will simply by what people happen to want; the general will was understood by Rousseau to be a norm that determines what everyone ought to will. But how is it possible to determine what everyone ought to will?  And, more importantly, who is to determine it?  The ambiguities of Rosseau's doctrine made it ripe for exploitation by Jacobin ideologues, who felt justified in “forcing people to be free”.