Locke and Hobbes

What is politics? Merriam-Webster dictionary defines it as the total complex ofrelations surrounded by people living in society. This phrase is the beginning of all politics and all regime. Whether we are ruler or subject, in the end we are all just people. And how canpeople outgo consult to each other? Over the years, countless individuals believed that they have the magic answer to this age-old question. Two figures in particular have endured thepraise and the criticisms Thomas Hobbes and earth-closet Locke. Each domain represents a philosophythat has marked him in history and in the popular consciousness. And each man offers hisunique commentaryalong with whatsoever surprising commonalitieson this abstract word we callpolitics.How should an affective organization approach its duties and serve ups? John Locke and Thomas Hobbes did hold some similar viewpoints on governments responsibilities. Both men favored a amicable contract between government and its people (Baker, 20 00). Hobbes stated in Leviathan, Whensoever a man transferreth his right, or renounceth it, it is either in consideration of some right reciprocally transferred to himself, or for some other good he hopeth for thereby.In other words, a man must be willing to sacrifice some of his basic rights in exchange for a promise of security and stability from his government. Ever since Moses and Biblical times, Hobbes points out, part has operated on a contract system (Panagia, 2003). Likewise, John Locke also advocated this precursor to federalism (Baker, 2000) men, when they enter into society give up liberty of a kind nonetheless it being only with an intention in every one the better to preserve himself, his liberty and property. (Locke, 2001)Locke believed that entering into much(prenominal) a covenant with government officials would best serve a common good and serve to create a common lawideals which were also shared by Hobbes (Baker, 2000). Hobbes himself claimed that the point of the social contract is to orchestrate a multitude into some recognizable whole. (Hobbes, 1968). The government was dependent on the support of the people, and its legitimacystable only as long as the public continues to recommend it (Hobbes, 1968).Once the function of a government is determined, the next question becomes, Who is thegovernment? On this point, Hobbes and Locke part ways. Since Hobbes held that human beings were essentially born bad, then logic would follow that they are not fit to rule themselves. Instead, they learn an overarching causation to awe them..likened to a sea monster, or a leviathan (Geib, 2002). Hobbes argued for a single-person leadership by claiming that multiple voices of authority created too much diffidence (or difference).Such confusion would inevitably plunge mankind back into a primitive state of warfare, the very condition it sought to eradicate through laws and government (Kreis, 2005) for powers divided mutually destroy each other (Hobbes, 1 968). Hobbes had witnessed firsthand the conflicts between the English king and Parliament, which hurled that country into a state of near-civil war (Chodorow, 1994).War and conflict resulted from every mans universal need for power. When one puts such strong egos into one room, resolution can never hope to be obtained. To Hobbes thinking, an entrustment of the power to one individual was the best way to ensure stability. And a monarchy, with its fit(p) and non-debatable succession of rulers, was Hobbes preferred choice of government (Panagia, 2003).Although Hobbes anticipated such democratic mantras as the right to remain silent and the right to property, his association with democracy affectively ends there. His compulsory monarchy refutes the people as a sovereign power, and his concerns for individual liberty are miniscule (Gray, 2003). In fact, Hobbes conservative views infuriated John Locke to such a percentage point that he published his own Treatises of Government, advoca ting a public-run government based on the liberty of the citizen. Locke raged that Hobbes monarchy left ruler and subjects in the very state of turmoil it announced to avoid (Chodorow, 1994).A singular government could only serve to oppress and deny. Government should instead divide itself into branches, each serving its own specialized function while keeping the other branches from becoming too powerful (like the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of American government today). (John Locke, 2001) After all, Locke claims, the people cannot sacrifice more power than they possessed in their natural, pre-law state. Once the people enter into a social contract with their chosen government, then the sovereignty necessarily relievers with the people (Landry, 1997).The people declare their leaders, and decisions rest with the consent of the majority, giving it either by themselves or their representatives chosen by them (Locke, 2001). The government may tax, it may allocate fun ds based on need (Landry, 1997), but it can never have a right to destroy, enslave, or designedly to impoverish the subjects (Locke, 2001). Most crucial in Lockes philosophy, the people rule.In the end, we are left with the question, Whose philosophy is best? Give us anotherthousand years, and we will still probably be quarrelling about the answer. Perhaps it is best instead to let each man have his final say on the subject and leave it at thatDuring the time men live without a common power to keep them all in awe, they are in that conditions called war and such a war, as if of every man, against every man.(Hobbes, 1968)It is a power that hath no other end but preservation, and therefore can never have a right to destroy, enslave, or designedly to impoverish the subjects...(Locke, 2001)ReferencesBaker, W. J. (2000). Faces of Federalism From Bullinger to Jefferson. Publius 30(4), 25.Chodorow, S. (1994). The Mainstream of Civilization. 6th ed. fortress Worth The Harcourt PressGeib, R . (2002). Thomas Hobbes. Retrieved October 24, 2006, from The Pessimists Pagehttp//www.rjgeib.com/thoughts/nature/hobbes-bio.htmlGray, J. (2003). The beast stirs. red-hot Statesman 132(4634), 50-51.Hobbes, T. (1968). Leviathan. C.B. MacPherson, ed. Harmondsworth Penguin.John Locke. (2001). Retrieved October 24, 2006, from Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophyhttp//www.utm.edu/research/iep/l/locke.htmKreis, S. (2005). Lectures on modern intellectual history Thomas Hobbes. Retrieved October24, 2006, from The History Guide http//www.historyguide.org/intellect/hobbes.htmlLandry, P. (1997). John Locke (1632-1704). Retrieved October 24, 2006, from Biographieshttp//www.blupete.com/Literature/Biographies/Philosophy/Locke.htmLocke, J. (2001). Two Treatises of Government and A Letter Concerning Toleration.Penguin Classics New York.Panagia, D. (2003). Delicate discriminations Thomas Hobbess science of politics. Polity 36(1), 91-114.