The Right Government: Thomas Hobbes, John Locke And Karl Marx

Smith advocated for free trade for a country. A country should export more than it imports. This stimulates the growth of the economy. Adam Smith was an optimist who sought the best for his country.

John Locke and Thomas Hobbes both believe that men are equal in the state of nature, but their individual opinions about equality lead them to propose fundamentally different methods of proper civil governance. Locke argues that the correct form of civil government should be concerned with the common good of the people, and defend the citizenry’s rights to life, health, liberty, and personal possessions. Hobbes argues that the proper form of civil government must have an overarching ruler governing the people in order to avoid the state of war. I agree with Locke’s argument because it is necessary for a civil government to properly care for its citizens, which in turn prevents the state of war from occurring in society. Locke also has a

Many philosophers believe that a correct government can make a strong society. However, these philosophers do not agree on what form of government is the most “correct”. English philosopher John Locke believed that Man is inherently moral and that the purpose for government is to grant the fundamental rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness to its people. Another philosopher, Thomas Hobbes, however, held the belief that mankind is naturally evil and that society needs an absolute central authority to contain this evilness and grant its people with the common protection. Hobbes believes that in a state of nature, when there are no rules and everyone is granted equal power, the inherent evil impulses of Man are exposed. One

John Adams once said, “Fear is the foundation of most governments.” Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and Karl Marx all grew up in a time of war and witnessed the same events that caused them to create their idea of government. Hobbes learned that people are naturally wicked, Locke learned that people all had natural rights. Karl Marx thought that the social order did not matter. All of them concluded that their governmental plan was the most reliable form of governing. They all had great ideas for government, but John Locke’s ideas would best fit today’s societies, and would best fit in with Adam’s Smith’s ideas.

The formation of government is one of the central themes for both Hobbes and Locke. Whether or not men naturally form a government, or must form a government, is based on man’s basic nature. According to Hobbes, a government must be formed to preserve life and prevent loss of property. According to Locke, a government arises to protect life and property. Governments are born of inequality and formed to administer equality.

Thomas Hobbes and John Locke are comparable in their basic political ideologies about man and their rights in the state of nature before they enter a civil society. Their political ideas are very much similar in that regard. The resemblance between Hobbes and Locke’s philosophies are based on a few characteristics of the state of nature and the state of man. Firstly, in the state of nature both Hobbes and Locke agree that all men are created equal, but their definitions of equality in the state of nature slightly differ. According to Locke, “…in the state of nature… no one has power over another…” Locke’s version or idea of equality in the state of

The key differences in the views of Thomas Hobbes and John Locke on the purpose of government lie within their contrasting views of the natural human state. Hobbes believed that people are naturally selfish, only acting in their own best interest, while Locke believed that people are naturally good, meaning that they can be trusted to govern themselves. Due to their differing beliefs regarding innate human state, their ideas regarding government varied greatly -- the two men were practically opposites. Hobbes believed that, due to their inborn selfish nature, people could not be trusted with democratic rule. Due to this fact, Hobbes argued for absolute authority to be given to one man, like a king. Hobbes believed that government is meant to

Since the limitation has been established, I will now address the extraordinary powers granted to the government. I briefly stated what part of the government is granted this extraordinary power. This part is the executive branch. To prevent the legislative body from creating laws against the public interest, the executive power is granted the power to work outside of the law, if necessary, for the public good. “This power to act according to discretion, for the public good, without the prescription of law, and sometimes even against it, is that which is called prerogative” (Second Treatise, Sect. 160). Therefore, this expansion of power to the executive “branch” is immense, but, only as a defense against foreign enemies and as a tool against

during the enlightenment there were many decisions on government and power hobbes and locke had many topics that they agreed and disagreed on. one of the topics is what is the natural state of mankind before forming a government hobbes and locke agreed on state of nature. another topic is on divine right or social contract hobbes and locke agreed on social contract. another topic was why government the disagreed on it hobbes said to protect us from ourselves locke said to protect our natural rights. where does sovereignty reside hobbes said the monarch of king locke said the people they disagreed once again. can a government’s power be limited locke said yes while hobbes said no he wants the government to have

In the assignment I will be looking at two types of government models as envisioned by Thomas Hobbes and Jean-Jacques Rousseau. These types of government vary differently from with regards to personal liberties and freedoms which individuals should have. I will then compare these types against our current government outline governing personal liberties in the constitution. Finally how our government has sacrificed our liberties to ensure freedom in regards to the evoking such legislation as the Patriot Act.

On the other hand, Queen Victoria is a combination of both Thomas Hobbes’s and John Locke’s philosophies. She is the Queen and ruled the country but also adapts Locke’s idea of government should protect peasants’ right. Thus, Locke’s idea of philosophy is about enlightenment and natural rights which applies to a republic or democrat. In Locke’s quote, Locke emphasized the words “liberty”, “free”, and “legislative authority” demonstrates how important equality and freedom is to Locke. Furthermore, the phrase “from any superior power” and “not to be under” thoroughly illustrated the ideal government and the purpose for the government: to protect the human natural rights. John Locke’s idea of enlightenment influenced a lot of country, especially in France and America; which eventually lead to the French and American Revolutions. For example, in 1750, Britain formed a 13 colonies along the eastern coast of North America. At first, the “Americans” were suppressed by the Britain. As they were influenced by the enlightenment idea, they started the revolution which leads to a new constitution. Lastly, Karl Marx presented the whole world with the idea of communism which are best referred to a social government. Marx’s idea is often influenced with unrealistic idealism and

The political writings of Thomas Hobbes, John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau focus a great deal of their work discussing various views of the state of nature, and the human nature for the establishment of political authority. These three theorists have many differing opinions of the purpose and reality of the state of nature, the purpose of government and the impact of founders and how men secure their rights. In the Leviathan, Hobbes believes that the state of nature is a constant state of war where reality does not exist. The state of war brings the necessity for all individuals to live their lives in a constant state of fear, and that all men are equal because the weakest man has the capability to kill the strongest. Due to the premise that the state of nature is a constant perpetual war, government must only control and provide law and order and not represent. In The Second Treatise of Government, Locke provides a much different account of the state of nature. Locke believes that all men are equal in the state of nature, and have the equality of freedom to do what they wish. Locke’s state of nature is not particularly a good or bad one. However, Locke believes that man’s natural rights are their property and their liberty and freedom, and that government should do what is necessary to protect that. Locke also believes that the establishment of political authority is best protective to the people when they are elected by the people and are responsive and accountable to

It is easy to compare certain things because of their proximity to one another and because of their similar nature. For instance, I wrote about Basque and Catalonian independence in Spain. While it may be apt to say that they are the same for a number of reasons. They were inherently different because of the small details that change their trajectory to land close to each other but not in the same place. Much is the same when comparing Hobbes’ and Locke’s theories on government, human nature, and natural law. Both may come to the same conclusion about the existence of natural laws and how that shapes human nature. However, they disagree on what the natural law would be comprised of. The same can be said for how differently they view the origins and role of governments. Hobbes would argue that governments are made from power and fear, and serve the purpose of keeping the covenant by protecting the inhabitants. Locke, on the other hand would argue that the basis of governments is law, and that the purpose of governments is to protect property rights. These and other factors will be examined to make a comparison and contrast of the two philosophers to determine if it is apt to say their theories are identical.

The political philosophies of Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and Karl Marx all vary in their political philosophies: Thomas Hobbes focused on the power with one, central, absolute monarch, “upon one man” or “one assembly of men”; John Locke emphasized that government not rule over the natural rights of every being, and that they are apart from “any superior power”; and Karl Marx outlined the government leading economic exchanges so that the “common people” could prosper, as mentioned in The Communist Manifesto. Of all, the ideas of John Locke most relate to those of Adam Smith and ultimately our world today. The social contract of Thomas Hobbes speaks mostly of how people only care about themselves, and that will not change. For this reason, humans should not have freedoms, but instead be ruled by an absolute monarchy. This monarchy will ensure that everything is systematic and everyone is compliant. Through his quote from the Leviathan, he makes clear that the only way for a government to succeed is if there is one central power guiding all people fearlessly. On the other hand, John Locke emphasized that all people were naturally the opposite: sensible and honorable. At birth, everyone was granted three distinct rights. Each person would have their own natural right to life and property, and to speak and live freely, also known as liberty. The government was not meant to interfere with the

Thomas Hobbes and Jean Jacques Rousseau were 17th and 18th century philosophers recognized for their works in political philosophy. Their visions and analysis of the world share original ideas that are still relevant to contemporary politics. Despite addressing many of the same issues, the two philosophers confronted on several ideas regarding human nature, the state of nature, and the social contract. This paper will examine the similarities and differences between the three issues by utilizing some of their most famous works: Thomas Hobbes’ “Leviathan”, Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s “The Discourse on the Origins of Inequality” and “The Social Contract”. These works will provide the basis on the origins of human nature and their relationship to social structures. While Hobbes and Rousseau may have similar approaches to understanding human nature, it is my belief that Thomas Hobbes shared a more realistic approach to the topics discussed as opposed to Rousseau’s point of view.