Is The Dichotomy Between John Locke And Thomas Hobbes Leviathan

In the 17th century there was a severe dichotomy between political ideologies that were best exemplified by the viewpoints of John Locke and Thomas Hobbes. Thomas Hobbes was the older of the two men, and the cornerstone of his political philosophy was his book Leviathan. He was a strong proponent of a monarchy. John Locke on the other hand is acknowledged as the father of liberalism. He was a prominent Enlightenment thinker and his ideas on republicanism and liberal theory greatly shaped the American Declaration of Independence.

In his book Leviathan, Hobbes argues that in a natural state, a theoretical state where there is no government, “the life of a man [is], solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short”. His view of the natural state of man was shaped largely by the English civil war, in which lives were understandably “brutish, and short”. Because of his perception of the natural state of humans, he believed that absolutism for the sovereign was essential to control the barbaric tendencies of humans and that the only way to do this was the absolute monarchy. Hobbes believed that people had no right to

rebel and that as long as the monarch maintained general order, the monarch must be obeyed.
John Locke, also known as the father of liberalism, believed that the formation of government should be to preserve life, liberty, and property and to uphold justice.

He believed that if the government abuses their power then they have breached their social contract with their citizens and therefore no longer have the consent of the governed. While Hobbes may have believed in the absolutism for the sovereign, Locke believed that a monarchy should not wield limitless power and should be subject to restrictions. According to Locke, society is bound to comply to a sovereign as long as that sovereign does not disregard the social contract. Unlike Hobbes, Locke believed that if a sovereign violates the social contract repeatedly, then society can replace said sovereign. While Hobbes believed that man by nature is brutish, Locke believed that man by nature is

social.
Despite their differences, these men had a lot in common. Hobbes and Locke both believed the monarchy to be the supreme form of government. They were both natural rights theorists and social contract theorists. Hobbes and Locke both believed in freedom and equality by natural right.
While both the perceptions of the two philosophers may have bee justified I personally find myself leaning more towards Locke’s political philosophy. His ideology is more in line with the Declaration of Independence than Hobbes. And even notwithstanding that, I find Hobbes’ theory to be quite insubstantial. His view on the absolutism of the sovereign fails to protect against tyranny or a possibly inept leader.