Jaehun Lee
3/13/18
Hobbes Reflection Paper
The Folly of Rebellion: What Hobbes Prescribes for Dissatisfaction with Trump
There are always some who hold up rebellion as the harbinger of progress; Thomas Jefferson once called it “a medicine necessary for the sound health of government.” However, Thomas Hobbes and his followers would disagree with such a sentiment, arguing that rebellion is counteractive and only destabilizes the secure life we live. When applying Hobbes’s Leviathan to current events, his warning against rebellion is reaffirmed; thus, despite people’s dissatisfaction with Donald Trump, we recognize that the worst option is to rebel.
First, Hobbes would argue that we have no reason to rebel because we gave Trump authority over …show more content…
In Chapter 14, Hobbes asserts that would-be citizens must “be willing… for peace and defense of himself… to lay down this right to all things” (80), fully relinquishing our natural right to self-preservation. While Hobbes recognizes our natural right to ensure our self-preservation in the state of Nature (79), entering the state requires us to give up those rights in exchange of peace and security, thus nullifying our right to protest, even in the name of self-preservation. If people want to exercise natural rights and protest, they reenter the state of Nature, where life is “nasty, brutish, and short” (76): the very reason why we entered the Leviathan in the first place. Man’s unquenchable thirst for power justifies a sovereign’s absolute power to keep our desires in check, as Hobbes outlines in Chapter 20 (135). Hobbes would have vehemently opposed bestowing rights unto subjects as our Founding Fathers had, as they open the door for citizens to oppose the sovereign. Expressing dissent against Trump is protected by the First Amendment, but Hobbes would argue that it is Trump’s duty to closely monitor this dissent and the citizens’ duty to allow this. As soon as the first flames of real rebellion are lit, Trump must stamp them out to carry out his duty as one who ensures the preservation of each citizen who completes his obligations. When these flames of …show more content…
In Chapter 18, Hobbes writes, “they that… attribute all the inconvenience to that form of commonwealth … not considering that the estate of man can never be without some incommodity or other…” (117). In doing so, he urges society to gain a perspective, reminding us that life in even the worst run state is preferable to the state of Nature. While many despise Trump, a world without rule of law entirely is a far worse world than with. Rebellion undermines Trump’s authority and power, which Hobbes argues are the necessary foundations to maintain a functioning society, regardless of the leader. Hence, there is absolutely no reason nor justification for a rebellion against Trump, or any ruler for that
3/13/18
Hobbes Reflection Paper
The Folly of Rebellion: What Hobbes Prescribes for Dissatisfaction with Trump
There are always some who hold up rebellion as the harbinger of progress; Thomas Jefferson once called it “a medicine necessary for the sound health of government.” However, Thomas Hobbes and his followers would disagree with such a sentiment, arguing that rebellion is counteractive and only destabilizes the secure life we live. When applying Hobbes’s Leviathan to current events, his warning against rebellion is reaffirmed; thus, despite people’s dissatisfaction with Donald Trump, we recognize that the worst option is to rebel.
First, Hobbes would argue that we have no reason to rebel because we gave Trump authority over …show more content…
In Chapter 14, Hobbes asserts that would-be citizens must “be willing… for peace and defense of himself… to lay down this right to all things” (80), fully relinquishing our natural right to self-preservation. While Hobbes recognizes our natural right to ensure our self-preservation in the state of Nature (79), entering the state requires us to give up those rights in exchange of peace and security, thus nullifying our right to protest, even in the name of self-preservation. If people want to exercise natural rights and protest, they reenter the state of Nature, where life is “nasty, brutish, and short” (76): the very reason why we entered the Leviathan in the first place. Man’s unquenchable thirst for power justifies a sovereign’s absolute power to keep our desires in check, as Hobbes outlines in Chapter 20 (135). Hobbes would have vehemently opposed bestowing rights unto subjects as our Founding Fathers had, as they open the door for citizens to oppose the sovereign. Expressing dissent against Trump is protected by the First Amendment, but Hobbes would argue that it is Trump’s duty to closely monitor this dissent and the citizens’ duty to allow this. As soon as the first flames of real rebellion are lit, Trump must stamp them out to carry out his duty as one who ensures the preservation of each citizen who completes his obligations. When these flames of …show more content…
In Chapter 18, Hobbes writes, “they that… attribute all the inconvenience to that form of commonwealth … not considering that the estate of man can never be without some incommodity or other…” (117). In doing so, he urges society to gain a perspective, reminding us that life in even the worst run state is preferable to the state of Nature. While many despise Trump, a world without rule of law entirely is a far worse world than with. Rebellion undermines Trump’s authority and power, which Hobbes argues are the necessary foundations to maintain a functioning society, regardless of the leader. Hence, there is absolutely no reason nor justification for a rebellion against Trump, or any ruler for that