Globilization: Different Aspects of Hobbes, Locke,& Rous
Globilization: Different Aspects of Hobbes, Locke, & Rousseau
The classical social contract tradition of Hobbes, Locke and Rousseau have, in spite of their variation in themes and emphases, been accepted as the basis to the development of liberal democratic theory and practice. Hobbes and Locke although sharing totally opposing views both propose legitimate systems of social organization. Hobbes believed that a society needed to be controlled by high authority otherwise each ones selfishness would take over and it would be uncontrollable. Locke on the other hand focused on individualism and the fact that everyone has the right to live their life the way they want to. Both proposals clearly have their pros and cons, but these men truly believed that their systems where the way to go.
Hobbes belief in man was not that of a positive one. He thought of man as an animal, selfish, aggressive and power hungry. He argued that a state of nature was a state of war, therefore the need for authority was vital to keep the peace. His idea of government was that of a chosen individual or group, which kept control through the use of fear of punishment which forced men to act in proper conduct. This government was then obligated to balance individuals interests and create culture, economy and wealth. In turn each citizen agreed to a common power to control them and look out for their best interests. Rebellion was impossible and the only rights one had was those the government granted. If we as humans were not so persuaded by our nature then this system of government would be successful, but we are too often ruled by our emotions and as he states we find three principle causes of quarrel; competition, diffidence and glory. As humans we have a right to make our own destiny, unfortunately in this type of system this is not the case, which does not fulfill ones individuality. Although this political system has a strong sense of control and community it does not allow oneself to be an individual, which some might argue is the whole point to life.
On the contrary, Locke believes that man has natural rights to life, liberty and property. In his eyes men are created free and equal, and know natural rights through reason and common sense, but he does feel man has the potential for evil and in that case proper punishment...