Exiting Anarchy

Exiting Anarchy: A Review on Hobbes

Thomas Hobbes is popularly known as the philosopher that spearheads the proposition for hierarchical rule over anarchical communities; he ultimately argued that “the task of politics … is to replace anarchic equality with hierarchical political authority”.[1] He did so by establishing several premises; 1) that the human nature of men, in its normal state, will inevitably lead to conflict; 2) that the only way to escape such conflict is for the whole community to sign a contract whereby they shed their rights to limit their actions to one another; 3) that there needs to be a higher authority that has the capacity to enforce the contract (preferably through force).

On his first premise, he originates his explanation from the assumption that “nature hath made men so equal in the faculties of both body and mind”,[2] that, for example, “even the weakest can kill the strongest, either by secret machination or by confederacy with others”.[3] This equality naturally results in men also having the equality of hope in obtaining their desired ends. And knowing that objects of desire are mostly finite, men become enemies in the competition for it; competitions which most certainly involve conflict (e.g. endeavors to destroy or subdue one another). In conclusion, one can see that the nature of men is the basis of conflict.

On his second premise, Hobbes underlies his explanation with the concept of jus naturale (e.g. the right of nature) which states that it “is the liberty [of] each man to use his own power as he will himself for the preservation of his own nature”.[4] And because the condition of man is a condition of conflict and war of everyone against everyone, which would entail that there is nothing that is not useful to him in preserving his life, then every man has a right to everything. But, if then others would lay down portions of their rights and not simply do anything he like, then that would divest the right of a man...