Does Hobbes's Sovereign or Locke's Civil Government provide better protection for the citizen?

Assessed Essay Political Ideas A

Does Hobbes’s Sovereign or Locke’s Civil Government provide better protection for the citizen?

Providing citizens who live anywhere throughout the world, with the best protection that can possibly be given to them is a usually a high prerogative by the people in charge of ruling the country. At this present time, Police forces, specifically state laws etc give us as citizen’s guidelines on how to behave and how to be protected. In this essay I will be looking at the theories of Thomas Hobbes and John Locke and how they provided theories on how to provide a strong and efficient method of protection for the citizens. Before I analyse different sources, the definition of protection for citizens needs to be clarified. I believe that better protection for the citizen deals with different elements of the citizen themselves. Protection in terms of security from violence, protection in terms of leading a better life and protection in order to help that citizen live with the liberty which they require and should be acquainted with. Therefore after analysing all the efficient resources I will come to an answer to the question as to which theory provides the best protection for the citizen.

Hobbes’s theory regarding the sovereign is a theory, which has been discussed for many years now. The sovereign that Hobbes’s refers to as his method of some sort of commonwealth government is given the “identity as a Supreme Political leader”, in which “Authority of sovereign is absolute and final, and extends over both ecclesiastical and civil concerns”. In other words whatever the sovereign decision may be, nothing is going to change the final outcome.

Firstly, in order to establish an understanding of why Thomas Hobbes believes that a sovereign is the only way in which a society can be ruled, it is important to look at the time period and society in which he lived in when he wrote his theory in Leviathan. Hobbes was writing Leviathan through a period of war, where man was killing man, and great social instability was occurring. This can be seen for one of his reasons for why Hobbes came to his concluding theory that the sovereign is the way in which everyone has to be led “When sovereign is issued, that’s the law, anyone who disagrees with it is seen as illegitimate”. This is the hard line that Hobbes felt he needed to implement, as during a state of war, citizens needed to be told what to do and need a strict law to abide by. Everyone needed to follow the same set of rules; this kind of sovereign is seen as an Absolutist government.

Absolutism was the only answer to Hobbes problem. He believed that due to the fact that everyone was equal in his society, where physical and mind didn’t matter, natural equality ensured that the citizens would thrive to be better than everyone else within their society, therefore maybe causing another civil war. Another reason aside from the fact that people would be thriving to be better than the other person, which could lead to a state of war, is the fact that there were two primary difficulties within the society in which Hobbes lived in.

The problem of liberty and property with regards to who has right deal with important issues such as raising taxation. Also problems over religion also occur in the society in which Hobbes lives in, and when citizens start to have differences in answers to these problems with there being no clarity of where the authority of the state is, results will probably have led to riots, or even a civil war. Absolutism seemed the only possible solution. Would a normal Democratically elected government be able to deal with such problems? Due to the intensity and instability of the society, I ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

There are many different functions to the sovereign, which helps provide a good basis of protection for the citizen. Firstly the fact that the sovereign is actually the singular law legislating body ensures that there is no room for debate on all aspects of the law, therefore ensuring that everyone abides by the same set of laws thus meaning all citizens in the state keeping to the same code hence no problems occurring.

The set-up of the sovereign is that, there is the sovereign at the top of the legislature in which everything that occurs; every decision made, is by the sovereign itself. Below the sovereign there is a section known as the deputies, which are appointed by the sovereign itself. The job of the deputies is basically just to do background work and help the sovereign with decisions when its calls for their help. The sovereign therefore has the ability to make all the decisions and laws which it thinks necessary and at the same time, it can call upon the deputies wisdom to help in the decision making of what laws to implement and what not to. This is all available due to the fact that the sovereign is the beneficiary of the right of nature.

The sovereign is important to the citizens who live in the society as it provides them with guidelines and rules to how to live a better life, however many citizens if not wanting to believe and obey the sovereign, will do due to the fact that, the sovereign is given the identity as supreme power and Hobbes believes that it is “Gods living representative”

The issue of self-preservation is important when discussing how well the sovereign actually protects the citizens in an effective manner. “The right of nature is a right to preserve oneself and the first law of nature includes a duty to preserve oneself” What this shows is that Hobbes realises and shows the importance of self preservation within the society in which he lives in at the time as he believes that everyone has a right to self preserve, in other words look after themselves. To emphasise this point he believes that the sovereign would make this his first law of nature, hence a right to do something and a law to do the same thing coinciding with one another, therefore showing us that the sovereign is protecting the citizen and allowing them to express their rights by making self-preservation a law of nature.

God plays an important part in Hobbes’s theory of creating a sovereign. God is superior in comparison to anyone else on the living planet. He is seen as the natural sovereign due to the fact that people live by the rules and laws set by him. However as well as having God as our political superior, we also have the political sovereign as our political superior too. The reason for this being that in the same way as we see God as a political superior e.g. answer to God for everything done in our lives, we also have to answer to the sovereign. The way, in which this is linked into how well the sovereign protects the citizen, is that it can be seen that by creating a sovereign the citizen will be protected for as long as it can be protected. Therefore, God and the political superior will keep the citizen protected until the citizen does not feel obliged to live to the sovereign laws anymore.

Whereas Hobbes believes in a sovereign state in which everyone has an obligation to abide and follow the rules, John Locke’s theory is based on the pursuing of a civil government, which Hobbes did not believe could happen. There are many reasons why Locke didn’t believe that a sovereign was needed in order for a state to be run correctly, efficiently and even more so a state which could protect its citizens better than if it was run in another way. Locke thought that if everyone was willing to give up all their rights to have a government to look after them without taking advantage and being rational towards them then a government without anarchy could be achieved.

One of Locke’s beliefs was that each individual has a right to execute a law of nature. In order for them to be run under a civil government they needed to pass that right to the commonwealth, and then to get rid of the state of nature, an official umpire of sorts in needed to look at the state of nature, and determine what goes and what doesn’t. Due to the fact that Locke believed that every single citizen had the right to punish and self-defence, his civil government would provide very good protection for the citizen. Locke believed that everyone has a right to punish someone who goes against the laws of the state and the laws of God, and therefore everyone has the right to punish as long as it is done calmly and rationally. If someone breaks the rules e.g. murders another person, they then become a danger to mankind. Everyone has the right to punish the executioner and the perpetrator, and the reason why everyone has the power to kill a murder because they have already broke the state of nature.

The fact that Locke believes this to be the best way for people to live poses a few problems mainly one when it comes down to the citizens protection. The fact that everyone has the right to punish the executioner poses the problem that the society in general could get very out of hand. It would mean everyone would feel that they are the ones, who have to deal with the problem, and it wouldn’t just be the police getting involved, it could turn into everyone. The problem which occurs is the fact that humans on a whole can be very impartial and many people could easily claim that another person has broke the law just for their own purposes e.g. if they hold a grudge against someone else. The way in which a civil government provides much needed protection to the citizen is that they would keep a hold of things and implement laws to stop people from going too far. The government would be appointed mainly to restrain the problems, which would be caused by men.

The issue of self-preservation like Hobbes in another one of Locke’s important theories, which lead onto how a civil government help the protection of citizens. “Everyone, as he is bound to preserve himself, and not to quit his situation wilfully, so by the like reason, when his own preservation comes not into competition, ought he, as much as he can, to preserve the rest of mankind, and may not, unless it be to do justice on an offender of the lift, the liberty, health, limb, or goods of another”. This differs a lot from what Hobbes believed in. Although they both believe that self preservation is an important issue in both societies at both times, the fact that Locke believes that self preservation is important for others within the society aswell as you as a person is an important factor as it indicates how society is coming together, more evidently than the society in which Hobbes lived in.

Hobbes society was one, which was unstable, and his theory of ‘everyone against everyone’ indicates that his society was one, which could easily get into a state of war. The fact that the citizens if they obliged the laws and theories, would help preserve one another makes it possible for a civil government to take place. This would not be able to occur in Hobbes society due to communication being very low and the fact that everyone being equal would evidently lead to war due to competition for becoming better than another citizen taking place. Therefore with the issue of self-preservation, the civil government would protect the citizens better due to the fact that the time period would allow better communication and a better understanding to occur. It could not happen in Hobbes’s time because instability within a society means that priority number one needs to be taken care of, and in this case it was the citizen himself or herself because they evidently had no choice.

In order for a civil government to become a reality, there are a few factors, which need to be considered in order for it to occur. The time in which the civil government wants to come into power and take over, e.g. a time of war, or a time of peace and tranquillity etc is very important. Hobbes was not able to think about having a civil government due to the fact that as I have previously mentioned, the time of his writings was when a civil war was occurring therefore, a civil government could not occur due to the fact that the society which it would be attempting to control would be too hostile, and to eager to start problems due to human insufficiencies such a need for competition.

In the state of nature which was evident during the period in which Locke wrote his theories, it is fair to say that things were a lot better in terms of a stable society being evident unlike Hobbes’s. For a civil government to occur, what needs to happen is for society to realise that in order to progress and move away from a state of nature, it needs to communicate and trust one another, e.g. self preservation and preservation of another. In order to be helped, the citizens need to help themselves.

In Hobbes’s society basically the society is going into anarchy and chaos and the only possible solution is really to create an Absolute government to take a strong hold of society and control it to stabilise it. It would be impossible for Hobbes society to move away from the state of nature because the society wasn’t ready. In Locke’s view everything follows suit, from his society where state of nature is evident, it then moves along to a civil government with natural laws i.e. laws which are already implemented some inside the heart and some from God. Then the citizen will be protected by the civil government aswell as being able to use its own mind because everyone has natural laws inside them, it’s just the fact that sometimes the freedom isn’t there to express and use it.

Overall in conclusion to the question of does Hobbes’s sovereign or Locke’s civil government provide better protection for the citizen, based on the evidence I would propose that Locke’s theory of civil government provides better protection for the citizen. The reason to why I have reached this conclusion is due to a number of factors. Locke allows the citizen to use natural law to a much larger extent than Hobbes and the fact that Locke has moved away from the state of nature and towards a government, which looks after the people in a more direct manner unlike an Anarchist government shows that stability can be achieved when society is given time to gel together.

However although I agree that Locke’s civil government provides a better protection for the citizen as a whole, I believe that Hobbes also provides suitable protection to the citizens in his society too under the circumstances, which was given to him. Although Hobbes’s period of time was one during the civil war, the laws and the issues surrounding the sovereign made it possible to see that Hobbes was trying to provide instant protection to the citizen individually rather than collectively as a society as a whole. This was due to the fact that in a state of war, sometimes the best method of protection is just plain and simply self-preservation.

Bibliography – Political Ideas A