Unlike Marx, Hobbes’s ideas surrounding the purpose of an authoritarian
government are more negative. Due to his conception of human nature, Hobbes
believes an authoritarian government is required to keep individuals out of the state of
nature. This is required because, in the state of nature, without a sovereign, individuals
would be free to pursue their self-interest and would have little regard for the welfare
of others. Hobbes regards the life of man in the state of nature to be “ solitary, poor,
nasty, brutish, and short ” (Hobbes, 1996, p.103). This understanding of human nature
can help explain why Hobbes argues for an authoritarian government. If humans are
self-interested, governing styles like democracy are insufficient because democracy is
essentially a self-governing system. It is impossible to be self-governing in the sense
of setting laws for oneself. The law-making body can never be subject to the laws it
makes because, as Hobbes argues, “ he that can bind, and release; and therefore he that
is bound to himself onely; is not bound ” (Hobbes, 1996, p.184). For Hobbes,
“ government is about the making and enforcing of law. The sovereign makes laws,
and laws restrict liberty, which is to say they oblige ” (Apperley, 1999, p.170). Ergo,
Hobbes advocates for a supreme sovereign to reign because “ the clear advantage of
both aristocracy and monarchy, is that in both cases the vast majority of people can
properly be said to be under the law ” (Apperley, 1999, p.170). This is required
because as people are self-interested, they pursue their interests without regard for
others. Therefore, the government is necessary to uphold social contracts enforce the
laws to protect individuals from each other.
Equally, an authoritarian government is required because the competitive quality of
human nature means a democratic government is incompatible. If individuals are self-
interested, as Hobbes claims, when they have the opportunity to speak in a democracy,
they will do so in the hope of persuading everyone to side with them (Hobbes, 1651).
Since it is impossible to allow every individual to have their say, democracy cannot
effectively distribute resources equally because not everyone is heard. As a result,
41
Made with FlippingBook HTML5