John Locke and Thomas Hobbes’ Views on The Role of Government

Introduction

In this essay I seek to argue that Locke and Hobbes have the same conclusion that there must be a government to rule the people but they just don’t have the same premises and argument as Locke is a classical Liberal meaning that unlike Thomas Hobbes, he believes that humans by nature are self-interested and rational as opposed to Thomas Hobbes that humans are self-interested and irrational. Hobbes believes government must have absolute power and authority.

Discussion

A state of nature refers to what life would be like without government laws, police and other things that makes the state. Hobbes believe that life in the state of nature is solitary, nasty, poor, brutish and short because Hobbes argues that humans by nature are irrational and have a desire for power and self-preservation and that we will use any means possible to fulfil these desires. He also argues that the world does not contain enough resources to sustain and satisfy everyone therefor meaning in a world with no government life would be totally horrible since everybody will be fighting for resources, power and self-preservation the war of all against all. A film called Lord of the flies is a good example without strong leadership to rule over the kids they do whatever it takes to survive.

On the other side Locke has a different views on that Locke argues that in a state nature because we are rational, we will be able to work out for ourselves how best to live our lives and what will benefit us the most there will be enough resources to go around and satisfy everyone and in the most part we will live a good and peaceful life. However, because we are self-interested, we will impose on the freedom of others what is called “the nature of law”. The law of nature is a set of national rights that Locke says all humans should have. The law of nature states no person may subordinate another or harm his or her life, health, liberty or possessions.

Locke argues that we should help one another when doing so does not cause harm to others. Without government we would have to enforce the law of nature ourselves however this is going to lead to problems because we won’t be able to get fair punishment without being bias. If we deal with punishment ourselves then what is there to stop us from confusing punishment with revenge and to severely punish those we hate. The same could be said or the other way around what is there to stop us not punishing those we like and are friend with. (Locke, 1689)

Furthermore, punishment maybe hard to carry out for example if a theft steal my crops and I go to punish him there is nothing stopping the theft from ganging up and taking back revenge on me but the only way I could than stop him is to get an even more powerful source to go and punish his gang. I might as well let the theft get away with it than to go through all the hustle of trying to punish him. Because of this Locke says there needs to be a government to act as a judge giving justice without implement bias unlike Hobbes however Locke says this is as much power by the state should be allowed to have any more power such as trying to introduce laws to businesses and individuals which limit liberty and be unjust but the question is having total liberty and freedom a good thing.

Hobbes says the government must have absolute power and authority. His only obligation is to is to protect state from outside danger and prevent danger from arising events he must therefor have strict rules and justice. (Hobbes, 1651) This is where their conflict lies between these two philosophers. I would have to agree with Locke the government can not have absolute power because the country will become a dictatorship which will lead to abuse of power as the dictator misuses his power at the expense of other citizens.

Conservatist such as Hobbes disagrees with Locke imagine what it would be like if we allowed half of the population of the state to get drunk every night it would be horrible many people would be horrible many people would not turn up for work in the morning because of hang overs they have, health services would be full of people with alcohol related issues and the streets at night would be chaotic since everyone is drunk and unsociable therefore conservatists argue that government need to impose strict rules as well as sort out dispute over the state in order to keep law and order and make sure its subjects are under control.

John Locke did respond to this by saying that freedom is a good thing since by allowing people to be free and live an autonomous life certain truths and knowledge would be uncovered. For example, by letting people be free and therefor choose to get drunk every night the truth by getting drunk every night is not good for society with be uncovered therefor meaning people mutually agree not to get drunk every night if laws are in placed to stop people from trying out new ways of living life.

Locke would say that certain truths are being denied from being found out it may be the case but life in society would be better if half of the population got drunk every night the only way to find out according to Locke is to let people try it out for themselves and by that because they are rational they would choose the correct and best in life. Hobbes argues that if the government fails to obtain his power civil war will break out and the government falls.

Conclusion

In a nutshell I have considered both Locke and Hobbes' arguments which some conflicted with each other but they both have the same conclusion which is there must be a government to rule although they have different “terms” which is Locke says the government can rule but not have absolute power whereas Hobbes says the government must have absolute power and authority. I disagree with Hobbes on the bases that if the government has absolute power there are high chances that the government will abuse this power and become a dictator oppress and supress the people or even promote their own favourites and interest. The population is never happy with that government. There must be a government to enforce the law in a country, but he must not have absolute power.

References

1. Hobbes, T. 1651. Leviathan. Bennet (Ed.) http://www.earlymoderntexts.com/ (Extracts)
2. Locke, J. 1689. Second treatise of government. Bennet (Ed.) http://www.earlymoderntexts.com/ (Extracts)