This is my essay for political theory. I am not confident, as always, that my work is appreciable. Please give you honest opinions. BTW, this is only a part I have taken in the middle body of the essay.

Every man has the interest of self-preservation and the security of property. In a nature where every person is solitary, no one can assure the preservation of himself and his belongings. Thus, it is a must that he would agree with other men in limiting their greed, in such manner that all of their desires can be satisfied. Because, if anyone can kill a person just to satisfy his needs all of us cannot assure our self-preservation. An agreement among us is a must. It is possible that some men may tolerate pain greater than others, but because every person has his limits he would also feel pain at some point. To lessen the possibility of this, he should agree with other men by forging a society where each of us can live peacefully. This society demands the universalization of moral ideas. Thus, you still have to agree with my terms so that we can form a society even if you have a higher tolerance to pain. Of course, the stronger man would conform to the majority because his endurance, although higher compared to others, has its limits.

What is the assignment? To me, a freelance writer and editor, it is unduly complicated, saying simple things -- a LOT of simple things -- in very hard-to-understand phrases. In fact, I have absolutely no idea what you are trying to say. It sounds too much like you are trying to sound intelligent and have a good command of English, but both fail. If I were your teacher, I would give you a D or a very low grade.

I think you can do a lot better in saying what you want to say and doing a good job.

'Society demands the universalization of moral ideas' is a common theme. But you make fairly broad and simple statements followed by 'thus' conclusions, 'it is a must,' and 'of course,' when you really aren't in a position to declare those conclusions. You talk about every one and no one, when there are plenty of exceptions throughout history. I don't know of any theorist who has ever argued that man can co-exist 'in such manner that all of their desires can be satisfied.' The problems of society pretty much are a compromise between personal freedom and the needs of one's fellow man.
You also talk about pain and strength in ways that sound physical only.

I would suggest that you pick one example of the demands of society on the individual, something specific, and enlarge on it, rather than trying to cover such a broad topic in a few sentences or even paragraphs.

I too have a hard time with your writing style.