.. is the liberty each man hath to use his own power, as he will himself, for the preservation of his own nature; that is to say, of his own life." (Harrison, 2003, p. 67). In other words, Hobbes is saying that every person has within them certain rights, yearnings and liberties; as such, the individual is entitled, and indeed should, pursue their own interests and not be oppressed by rulers. Likewise, rulers should not attempt to force subjects into submission or to rule by intimidation or fear- for Hobbes, power must be earned and maintained through a level of fairness (Rogers, et al., 2000). Within this scope, the ruler should be motivated, in Hobbes' opinion, by serving the interests of the people over whom they govern. Likewise, the citizens would be involved in the political process, and the ruler, having earned the right to rule, would have the duty to effectively lead with conscience rather than sheer force.
Political Philosophies of Machiavelli and Hobbes
Having taken a close look at the theories of Machiavelli and Hobbes respectively, it is possible to draw on the similarities and differences between the two in regard to their political philosophies. While it would be tempting to simply conclude that both men were totally dissimilar in their philosophies, this is not so; rather, there are some basic tenets upon which it can be said they agree. Admittedly to varying degrees, both Machiavelli and Hobbes believe in the use of force to maintain power- this is seen in the writings of Machiavelli and Hobbes respectively,...
144);
Not believing in force is the same as not believing in gravitation." (Rogers, et al., 2000, p. 99). An essential difference between these philosophers in reference to force is how it is used; while Machiavelli advocates the use of force to gain and maintain power, Hobbes believes that force should only be used to maintain power which was gained through legitimate channels, the will of the people, and the cornerstone of freedom and liberty (Harrison, 2003).
Conclusion
Political philosophy, as well as the legitimacy of power, are pivotal issues that will likely continue to be debated as long as thinking individuals exist in the world. This being said, this research has shown that the ideas of two men from two different generations, holding different views in many areas, also seem to agree on others. In closing, perhaps this speaks the loudest regarding the nature of power and the state- authority, however gained, must be wielded with great care, for without that caution, chaos is likely to ensue.
References
Harrison, R. (2003). Hobbes, Locke, and Confusion's Masterpiece: An Examination of Seventeenth-Century Political Philosophy. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Rogers, G.A. & Sorell, T. (Eds.). (2000). Hobbes and History. London: Routledge.
Viroli, M. (1998). Machiavelli. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sociology-Theories
