Hobbes contends that the government should greatly restrict individual liberty because free individuals necessarily act in ways that threaten the survival of their society. Reversing the traditional maxim, which says that individual liberty empowers and enriches society but weakens government, Hobbes contends that individual liberty strengthens government but endangers society. While it seems that Hobbes is fearful of threatening the government, a close reading of Leviathan show that Hobbes is so fearful of threatening society that he believes that the government should focus exclusively on ensuring the survival of its society without regard to the quality of that survival. Therefore, he contends, the government should neutralize the threat of the individual by disarming him of his liberty and by forcing all individuals to behave in a way that protects society’s survival. We must begin by distinguishing individual liberty from the other type of liberty that Hobbes discusses, what we will call “ancient liberty.” Individual liberty is “the absence of… external impediments of motion” (Hobbes XXI 1, XXI 10).
Hobbes explained, “…and the... ... middle of paper ... ...en are evil in their state of nature and that the public should not have control in the government system. This was a part of Hobbes’s social contract in which he makes the agreement that man must obey the laws and rules of the absolutist government. Although the theory worked for Hobbes during the time period he lived, Locke had a different approach in government in which society was more involved. Locke described man as a rational human being who pursued almost identical characteristics to an authority. Locke argued that a monarch was the best way to run a government, but he argued that the people had the right to express how they felt about their ruler as a whole.
He goes on to point out that the world would only be chaotic if there aren’t absolute monarchs. Hobbes believes man must establish the Leviathan by making a social contract and only then will the world run ideally. He considers the state of nature like the human body; the government being the head and the citizens being the body. The head is in absolute control but the body can still create harm on itself and the head but only if the head allows it. The people (the body) must give consent to the government to have absolute rule.
Before looking at what type of Government is best, it’s important to know about human nature because gives us an idea of the type of people, who would have the power in Government. Human nature deals with the distinguishing characteristics, including ways of thinking, feeling and act, which humans tend to have naturally, without any influence from the culture around them. Between both of them, Hobbes was the one that had a negative view of human nature. He believed that people were born to be bad and cruel and would act on behalf of their own best interests, like “Every man for himself” and that society could not exist exce... ... middle of paper ... ...at should the people do? With Rebellion against the Government that is abusive to the people.
The implications of liberals believing in this statement are that they believe that rational individuals should want to sign up to a social contract to establish a sovereign government. Individuals would want to do this because life before government was endless civil war, with life being; solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short. Life would be this way because individuals are selfish, greedy and power seeking. Therefore rational beings would enter into a social contract and sacrifice a portion of their liberty to set up a system of law; this would prevent the otherwise inevitable: property and lives being under constant threat. Seventeenth century writer John Locke said “Where there is no law there is no freedom.”
How could the founding fathers save the Union and “secure the Blessing of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity?” (Constitution) They designed the constitution to rejected the democratic Articles to embrace a constitutional form of a republic government. So that the freedom of the people would be ensured by protecting their liberty from the corruptible nature of man. Any form of “Constitutional degeneration was the technical definition of ‘corruption’...corruption was the normal direction of constitutional change” ( Banning, 174) “Pride of independence deep and dangerous hold on the hearts of many of the state politicians” ( Bennett, 112) The leadership under the Articles at the state level was more democratic. However, was heading towards oligarchy, because these men who were in power often only concern themselfs with their own state, and competing with other states to benefit their state or goals. The politicians were using their power to .
Locke saw the government as a safeguard to protect the rights of the individuals as the guarantor of society and the consenting government. But he also suggested that people had the right to rebel, to remove governments which failed to fulfil what the society wanted. Locke was a liberalist and believed that people have the right to reserve and restrain offenders, but not to judge them. Thomas Hobbes was born in 1588; he lived thr... ... middle of paper ... ...e is no power to enforce a covenant. Therefore all sovereigns are in a state of war with each other.
His call for strong government so as to avoid a war and chaos seems most effective. By realizing rulers are selfish he suggested monarchy was the best option for a government. In order to have the king take interest in the public, that selfishness was going to have to be taken advantage of in the form of a government. A selfish king would not put his country in danger nor would he want disorder. It would be better to submit to the king than have mayhem and war.
First of all it ensures public accountability. This gives the people a degree of protection against governments becoming too strong. Liberals believe in limited government, and democracy provides this system, as the government is accountable to the people. Although most liberals would agree that government is essential in order to defend the rights of the people, it can also be seen as a threat to individual liberty, so people need some form of protection against it. According to John Stuart Mill, ‘the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilised community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others’.
Civil Disobedience by Henry David Thoreau Thoreau's essay entitled "Civil Disobedience" i was an excellent way of educating the public on why people should not settle for a less than perfect government. His belief in demanding a better government was a great reminder that Thomas Jefferson insisted that it was our "duty, to throw off"(2) an unsatisfactory government in the "Declaration of Independence" ii Thoreau's essay also explained why people choose not to do anything about it. Thoreau stated that people "cannot spare the protection of the existing government, and they dread the consequences to their property and families of disobedience to it" (25). So it makes sense that most people would not be willing to risk losing their property, family, or their life. However, we should not feel this way because Jefferson also stated that "Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just power from the consent of the governed.