Liberal Absolutism, Liberal Constitutionalism, and the American Presidency
The objective of this paper is to firstly, compare and contrast the Hobbesian notion of liberal absolutism with Lockean liberal constitutionalism and secondly, elucidate how these similarities and differences impact the American presidency. I will begin by explicating liberal absolutism and liberal constitutionalism and then proceed to articulate their points of similarity and difference. I will the iterate how the differences and similarities impact the way we understand the American Presidency. I will show that liberal absolutism and constitutionalism can linger into the role of the president, I will specifically look to the case of the Whiskey Rebellion to show this. …show more content…
Both the Hobbesian and Lockean account of the state of nature rests on the notion of inherent equality, where there is no ascribed status or class. Everyone is essentially free to act as they will. Another point of similarity between these two philosophers is that self-preservation is central to the state of nature. They both believe that we enter a social contract to create a political authority because of the fear of death. Another point of similarity between Hobbesian’s and Lockean’s is they base their system on necessity. The nature of politics in a republican system allows for the executive to take control (either through absolute power or through prerogative power) to promote the necessity of survival. Liberal absolutism as well as liberal constitutionalism brings back necessity to determine what is good and what is …show more content…
Let me explain. The president may feel the decision to act to protect the will of the people in a way that controls them. An example of this can be seen in the Whiskey Rebellion. The Whiskey Rebellion occurred when the people of the United States refuse to pay a tax on whiskey imposed upon them and ended up with the president intervening in Pennsylvania (a state where whiskey was almost as valuable a resource as money) (Nelson, 88). Washington issued a proclamation in 1794 which resulted in a supply of an army to defeat the rebellion (Ibid). Washington’s act is an example of what I am arguing which is, that the president can act at times as an elected
The objective of this paper is to firstly, compare and contrast the Hobbesian notion of liberal absolutism with Lockean liberal constitutionalism and secondly, elucidate how these similarities and differences impact the American presidency. I will begin by explicating liberal absolutism and liberal constitutionalism and then proceed to articulate their points of similarity and difference. I will the iterate how the differences and similarities impact the way we understand the American Presidency. I will show that liberal absolutism and constitutionalism can linger into the role of the president, I will specifically look to the case of the Whiskey Rebellion to show this. …show more content…
Both the Hobbesian and Lockean account of the state of nature rests on the notion of inherent equality, where there is no ascribed status or class. Everyone is essentially free to act as they will. Another point of similarity between these two philosophers is that self-preservation is central to the state of nature. They both believe that we enter a social contract to create a political authority because of the fear of death. Another point of similarity between Hobbesian’s and Lockean’s is they base their system on necessity. The nature of politics in a republican system allows for the executive to take control (either through absolute power or through prerogative power) to promote the necessity of survival. Liberal absolutism as well as liberal constitutionalism brings back necessity to determine what is good and what is …show more content…
Let me explain. The president may feel the decision to act to protect the will of the people in a way that controls them. An example of this can be seen in the Whiskey Rebellion. The Whiskey Rebellion occurred when the people of the United States refuse to pay a tax on whiskey imposed upon them and ended up with the president intervening in Pennsylvania (a state where whiskey was almost as valuable a resource as money) (Nelson, 88). Washington issued a proclamation in 1794 which resulted in a supply of an army to defeat the rebellion (Ibid). Washington’s act is an example of what I am arguing which is, that the president can act at times as an elected