Thomas Hobbes and John Locke have very different views on the government and society in general. Locke seems to content that human beings have the natural ability to work together, and as such a government will eventually not be necessary. Thomas Hobbes opposes this, saying that people in general are not good, and need a governing body to be controlled. Arguments of the nature have been going on forever, and will probably exist well into the future. While I disagree to each extreme that Locke and Hobbes present, I find myself agreeing more with Thomas Hobbes than John Locke.
John Locke assumes that people in general are able to function without a governing body, and as such “are better off without a government” (P.12, Para 2, Two Treatises of Government). The notion here is that if every human works as a contributing body in the community, the community should not require a force above them. These ideals are directly related to communism. While the Locke ideals are not communism in itself, they are very closely related. Communism in our world today is basically a very small leading power, while everybody else is lower and equal. While Locke would disagree that they need a leader in order to function, he would be keen to the idea that everybody is equal and works together. The problem with this is that human nature dictates differences between individuals. What happens when two people following their dreams must step on each others throat in order to reach them? Conflicts will occur no matter how equal and balanced a society is. Locke believes that a government should only exist with consent of the governed. This is one of the ideals I find particularly appealing of Locke’s. The idea that a government should only exist if the people think a government is necessary is quite controversial. This idea supports the notion that human beings as a whole have the ability to make decisions that are for the good of the people. I don’t believe this is possible. I think for some people in a society, the government existing is beneficiary to their lives. In this case, the people that benefit from being governed would oppose the removal of government, creating conflict between the parties.
Thomas Hobbes idea is that human nature dictates that human beings will always need a governing body in order for society to be maintained. His notion is that all human beings have the need to be governed, and that governments need a large amount of power to control the people. While I disagree that all people need to be governed, I think there will always be a select group of people that cannot function in society without a governing body. The combination of human nature and society in general has driven some individuals to a lifestyle that is destructive to a society. If a society with these people with no governing body existed, chaos would likely exist and the freedoms of the people that don’t need a government would be in jeopardy. The idea that the government needs as much power as possible is not particularly appealing to me. When a government get’s too large, it’s common for a government to forget that it exists to serve the people. A growing government works much in the same way as a growing business monopoly. When everybody is under your command and you have a large amount of power, you tend to either abuse your power or maintain your power that quite frankly isn’t necessary for society. I like Hobbes’s idea that a government needs to exist, but I don’t like his pessimistic ideals on human nature. A government needs to exist, but this government should be as small as necessary for society to be maintained well.
John Locke
Two Treatises of Government
http://www.google.com/books?id=K1UBAAAAYAAJ&printsec;=frontcover&dq;=two+treatises
Thomas Hobbes
Leviathan
http://www.google.com/books?id=-Q4nPYeps6MC&printsec;=frontcover&dq;=leviathan
