Creator
Government and its role in society:
Perspectives from Thomas Hobbes, John Locke and Jean Jacques Rousseau
Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and Jean Jacques Rousseau were political theorist that agreed on many points, even though their ideas about government were different. They were considered the principal social contract philosophers.
They each believed that people had lived without government at one time and that they had been governed by natural law in the state of nature. The process of organizing society and creating government was called the social contract. In addition, they believed that people were essentially equal under natural law and that legitimate political power was derived from the people.
Nevertheless, while these philosophers agreed on many points, there were also many areas in which they differed. They agreed that the individual should be free, but they disagreed on the definition of freedom. The conservative Hobbes suggested that freedom was possible only when the individuals in society subordinated themselves completely to the monarchs. The liberal Locke, on the other hand, thought that freedom was greatest when the individual was left alone. The radical Rousseau believed that human freedom would be achieved only through the creation of a new society in which equality was the dominant principle. Like Hobbes, Rousseau argued that freedom was possible only when individuals subordinated themselves to the sovereign authority.
The three philosophers also varied in their attitude toward government itself. Hobbes thought that an absolute monarchy would best suit the needs of the people. Locke favored a parliamentary republic in which the government did little except arbitrate disputes between citizens. Rousseau, adopting the most radical point of view, believed the community created an infallible general will by a direct democratic vote of all the people in the society.
Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679): Hobbes believed that monarchy was the best possible form of government, yet he rejected the theory of the divine right of kings. Instead, he claimed that the social contract was the source of royal power. Though Hobbes believed that royal power came from the people, he placed few limits on the monarch.
He imagined that life in “the state of nature,” before civil society was founded, must have been terrible. Every man would have been the enemy of every other man, a “war of each against all.” Humans would live in savage squalor with “no arts; no letters; no society; and worst of all, continual fear, and danger of violent death; and the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.” To get out of this horror, people would—out of their profound self-interest—rationally join to form civil society. Society thus arises naturally out of fear. People would also gladly submit to a king, even a bad one, for a monarch prevents anarchy (Roskin et al 2016:38).
In exchange for order, the people would agree to surrender all their natural rights to a monarch and render to him complete obedience. The sole function of the king, on the other hand, was to keep order. If he was able to do so, his subjects were bound to obey his laws. If he failed to keep the peace, only then could the people resist him. The monarch was not bound by the rules of the social contract. As the king, he was sovereign and only he could make the laws.
The idea of stability and social order that was the central theme of Hobbes’s political philosophy, has influenced the thinking of many social thinkers with regards to the effective and efficient operation of government institutions. Hobbes’s view of absolute sovereignty for the purpose of regulating the selfish nature inherent in man is a manifestation of the collaborative operations of government and the people to establish a stable society (Public Admin. pg.15).
John Locke (1632-1704): 17th century thinker, John Locke was also known as the “Father of liberalism”. In his Two Treatises of Civil Government (1690), Locke made a case against the divine rights of the king to justify the overthrowing of James II and instead mooted for a government based on consent of the ones being governed. In addition to be being a philosopher, Locke was also a political activist who was greatly admired by Thomas Jefferson, the principal author of American declaration of independence and one of the founding fathers of United States of America (Mumbai).
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.”
– Thomas Jefferson (1743–1826), American Declaration of Independence.
Locke believed that government should be strictly limited. He thought it performed a vital function which was to serve the people. He believed that most people could act fairly and efficiently by themselves and insisted that government should not interfere with the individual in such cases. Yet, there were times when governmental activity was necessary to protect the rights of the people. These natural rights came from Locke’s belief in natural law.
Natural law, according to Locke, guaranteed each individual certain natural rights that could not legally be taken away, or alienated, without due process of law. Because all people are equally subjected to the natural law (the same moral strictures), each person owes every other person a degree of respect and consideration. These inalienable rights were summarized as “life, liberty, and estate”. He also believed that individual freedom was an essential right.
It is important to note that Locke did not claim that all people were equal in all ways. He recognized that people differed in intelligence, physical prowess etc., but regardless of the obvious differences among people, they all had the same natural rights because of the natural law. It applied to all people in equal measure. No one had a greater claim to liberty than anyone else.
John Locke was very optimistic about human nature. His view on the state of nature prior to society and government was “peace, good will, mutual assistance and preservation”. He believed that governmental restrains on people were largely unnecessary. He argued that people were most free when they were left unfettered by government.
Yet even though he thought the state of nature for people were usually peaceful, they were not perfect. From time to time some people might try to take advantage of others. Conflict could occur in the state of nature and because there was no third party to settle the dispute, individuals were forced to defend their own liberties. This clash presented a problem because people were not equal in their ability to defend their rights from attacks. Therefore, injustice could occur in the state of nature because the person who manages to prevail over another may succeed only because he or she is stronger and not because he or she is right.
Locke saw the need for an agency to dispense justice among them. This led the individuals to make a contract (a social contract) among themselves, thereby creating a society. The government is then created as an agent of the society. Also, since government and society are not the same thing, the fall of a government need not mean the end of a community. The community could create a new government to serve it if its original government was unsatisfactory.
Locke was very particular about the structure and form of government. He assumed that society could use the will of the majority as a formula for deciding correct policy. If individuals did not accept the decisions of the majority, they would have to leave the society, thus returning to the state of nature and forfeiting the protection of the government.
Locke also thought that people should be governed by a parliament elected by citizens. He saw members of a parliament as representing their constituents and he believed that they should vote as their constituents wanted. Therefore, the relationship between the government and the governed remained close and although the people did not actually make the law themselves, the law was a product of their preferences.
John Locke also called for separation of the executive and legislative powers. He believed that the legislature, which was the direct agent of the people, should take precedence over the executive branch. The legislature should decide on the policy of the government and the executive should dutifully carry out the mandates of parliament.
Locke believed that people were sovereign and that they had the right to rebel against an unjust government. The government’s sole purpose was to serve the individual in such a way as to increase individual rights and liberties. At all times it was to stay out of the people’s business. If the government ever acted otherwise, for example, if it involved itself too much in the affairs of the people, thus reducing their rights and liberties without good reason, the people would then have the right to put that government out and create one that would serve them better (Baradat pg.78).
Jean Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778): Rousseau also believed that there had been a time when neither government nor society existed. He believed that people in this state of nature were simple, shy and innocent. He also believed that they avoided conflict rather than seeking it out. Life was peaceful in this state of nature, but it was not fulfilling.
Rousseau believed that people wanted to improve themselves, to make themselves better. This goal, however, could not be achieved in this state of nature because, while it was an innocent condition, it was not a moral life. People were then compelled to forge a social contract, forming a community and therefore abandoning the state of nature. The community then established a moral code that made human perfection possible or becoming more human, or civilized, a possibility.
Rousseau was even more particular about the governmental form he thought the community should use. First, he believed that each individual’s will was inalienable or not subject to being taken away from them and could not be transferred to another. Consequently, he opposed representative government, since no one could represent another individual. This led him to favor a direct form of democracy. This is one in which the citizens vote on the laws themselves instead of sending representatives to a legislature.
All political power, according to Rousseau, must reside with the people, exercising their general will. The people, meeting together, will deliberate individually on laws and then by majority vote find the general will. Rousseau’s general will was later embodied in the words “We the people . . .” at the beginning of the U.S. Constitution (Bria).
However, because of the limited technology of his time, the direct democracy recommended by Rousseau required that the state be very small. Rousseau believed that the city-state was the only political entity small enough for all citizens to meet and vote on every law or policy.
Rousseau was also very careful to distinguish between executive and legislative functions and powers. First, he insisted on complete separation of the two. He demanded that the legislature should be more powerful than the executive. The legislature consisted of all the people, or the community, making the general will. Therefore, it was the sovereign or all-powerful body. The executive was merely the government, and the government only served the community. It had no special rights or privileges and could be changed at any time while the community remained unchanged.
In conclusion, although Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and Jean Jacques Rousseau had a difference of opinion on many things, they all believed that government was not a natural condition. Government was a deliberately and rationally conceived human invention, and the social contract was the act of people creating and empowering governments.
Works Cited
-
Baradat, Leon P, Political Ideologies: Their Origins and Impact, Eighth Edition, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, 2003.
-
Roskin, Michael G., Cord, Robert L., Medeiros, James A., Jones, Watler S. Political Science: An Introduction, 14th Edition, published by Pearson Education 2016.
-
Political Ideologies - Mumbai University
https://mu.ac.in/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/143-Political-Ideologies.pdf Accessed 23 September 2023.
-
Theories of Public Administration
https://onlineresearchjournals.com/ijopagg/art/182.pdf Accessed on 23 September 2023.
-
BRIA 20 2 c Hobbes, Locke, Montesquieu, and Rousseau on Government
https://www.crf-usa.org//bill-of-rights-in-action/bria-20-2-c-hobbes-locke-montesquieu-and-rousseau-on-government.html#:~:text=He%20believed%20in%20a%20direct,state%20like%20his%20native%20Geneva. Accessed on 26 September 2023.