Thomas Hobbes and John Locke were two social contract theorists, and natural law theorists, whose views on government were very different. Hobbes believed in the power of the ruler, and he believed that society could not function without the power of the state. Hobbes believed in an absolutist government. Hobbes argued that people were driven by two things: the desire for power and the fear of death at someone else’s hands (Sayre, 2012). He believes that it was the role of the government that would keep these instincts in line.
By disregarding the state of nature, the powers of each individual is directed towards a common interest. Rousseau notes that social freedom is superior to a state of nature, and that in a state of nature people are not completely free because they are ruled by their desires instead of by reason. The General Will is rational and should then be the ruling body. "The general will is always right," claimed Rousseau. The general will is not something that
The two historical figures came together and created a government that still hold strong, centuries later, today. Thinkers of the 17th-18th centuries often hypostasized the state of nature, to aid with their feelings of how government should be. John Locke believed that man is by nature a social animal (James). Therefore, John Locke believed the only way the people could be kept under control
Locke defended the proposition that government rests on popular consent and rebellion is permissible when government subverts the ends for which it is established i.e. the protection of life, liberty, and property. Jean-Jacques Rousseau philosophy was the idea that people give the government the power to rule over them. Locke advocated governmental checks and balances and believed that revolution is not only a right but an obligation in some circumstances. These ideas would come to have profound influence on the Constitution of the United States and its Declaration of Independence.
The federalists thought the constitution would protect the people’s rights, and the laws. The Anti-federalists thought the government was fine the way it was. Third, in my opinion the federalists truly believed in the people’s rights more than the Anti-federalists. The constitution was made to protect the people’s rights, such as life, liberty, and property. The Anti-federalists thought only those worthy enough of life, liberty, and property, should have rights.
John Locke, an Enlightenment thinker, highly influenced the Declaration of Independence. He mentioned that he believed there were natural rights that all people had life, liberty and property. The Founding Fathers added that in the Declaration of Independence (Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness). Another idea Locke had was that if a ruler was oppressing his people, the people had the right to rebel. For Jefferson to write the Declaration it was considered treason, but he wrote in the
What Did Early Thinkers Say About the Nature of Government and Whether or Not People can be Trusted to Govern? The Enlightenment is a movement of ideas which valued reason and understanding natural law to human society. What did early thinkers say about the nature of government and whether or not people can be trusted to govern? Early thinkers such as Abigail Adams, John Locke, and Baron de Montesquieu argued that people had natural rights given by god. The role of nature of government helped people to protect their rights when famous Enlightenment thinkers believed people could be trusted to govern.
Locke argues that all men are of the same species making them all equal and placed on the same rank. He uses this to justify why all human beings deserve to participate in government and not be ruled blindly by an absolute monarch. During this time kings were viewed as superior to other human beings; Locke argues that since we all are of the same species that their is no “superior” human being. This point then helps Locke explain why all humans deserve to take part in how they are governed. Along with his ideas of human equality and the elimination of social hierarchy, Locke also advocated man's natural right to freedom.
They assume that equality among the people exist to the level where the individual will fulfil his responsibility keeping not just his motives in mind but that of society. There is also the assumption that individuals in a democracy will either be provided with or have already acquired the sense of politics and civic action through various levels of education. All these suppositions are what make the theories of democracy seems possible or even viable. Without them, the ideas would be lost on the public and democracy reduced to a rubber stamp that exists but cannot exert its rights. UN Secretary General Kofi Annan (‘97-‘06) states No nation is born a democracy.” By this he means, that nations need to build on their idea of what democracy should include and aspire to maintain that standard.
All the citizens were to govern themselves in a way where they would not interfere with another person’s happiness. Gandhi’s definition of civilization contradicts imperialism because of the Swaraj beliefs that he implements in his idea of a civilization. The two ideas are on opposite ends of spectrums that is mainly defined in the difference that imperialism demonstrates a strong presence and ruling of the government, whereas Swaraj suggests that the state is self-governed through the moral of each individual. India had various sources of British influence such as, education centers, government rule, military, and more. Swaraj beliefs emphasized that these foreign influences should be rid of, which in turn would end British imperialism in India.