Page 102 - DPOL201_WESTERN_POLITICAL_THOUGHT_ENGLISH

Western Political Thought

Notes of the contract, an artificial person distinct from the natural individual. It was not the common
will of all, for such an idea did not exist but was only a substitute for conflicting individual wills,
as that would guarantee unity among multitudes within in a commonwealth. The contract created
an artifact in the sovereign authority whereby each individual gave up his right of governing
himself, on the condition that others did likewise. The only way to erect the common power:
... is, to conferre all their power and strength upon one Man, or upon one Assembly of
men, that may reduce all their wills, by plurality of voices, unto one Will; which is as
much to say, to appoint one Man, or Assembly of men, to beare their Person; and
everyone to owne, and acknowledge himself to be Author of whatsoever he that so
beareth their Person, shall Act or cause to be Acted, in those things which concern the
Common Peace and Safety ... .
Each individual, by consenting to a set of rules, guaranteed basic equality with every other member.
This also meant that no one possessed more rights than another. The sovereign must treat all the
individuals equally in matters of justice and levying taxes. Hobbes defined justice as equality in
treatment and equality in rights. It also involved keeping one’s promises, for non-performance
would lead to an unequal status. Hobbes equated justice with fairness, treating others as one
would expect to be treated.
Once the sovereign power was created it would be bestowed with all powers. “This is the Generation
of that great Leviathan, or rather (to speak more reverently) of that Mortall God, to which we owe
under the Immortall God, our peace and defence”.
The contract created civil society and political authority, for it was a social and political contract.
It was a contract of each with the other. A commonwealth could be established by two methods:
acquisition, and institution. Acquisition was when individuals were threatened into submission.
The process of institution was when individuals, of their own impulse, united, agreeing to transfer
all their natural powers through a contract to a third party of one, few or many. Both were
contractual, though the process of institution exemplified the essence of contractualism. The contract
was perpetual and irrevocable. Individuals limited their sovereignty voluntarily by creating a civil
society.
Hobbes preferred the beneficiary of the contract, the third person, to be a monarch. Commonwealths
differed not due to the nature of the sovereign power, but in the numbers who wielded and
exercised this power. Monarchy was preferable to an aristocracy or democracy because of the
following reasons:
1. the self-indulgence of one compared to that of many would be cheaper;
2. the existence of an identity of interests between the king and his subjects; and
3. less intrigues and plots, which were normally due to personal ambitions and envy of members
of the ruling elite.
Adhering to the Monist view, Hobbes saw the sovereign power as undivided, unlimited, inalienable
and permanent. The contract created the state and the government simultaneously. His defence of
absolute state power in reality was a justification of absolute government or monarchy, because of
a failure to distinguish between the state and the government. However, absolute power was not
based on the notion of the divine rights of kings, but derived through a contract that was mutually
agreed upon and willingly acquiesced to. He dismissed the divine rights argument, but was
unwilling to press the contractarian argument to its logical conclusion, for he did not provide for
either a renewal of consent or a periodic assessment of the sovereign by the people.
The sovereign power or the “dominium’’, a term used in De Cive, was authorized to enact laws as
it deemed fit and such laws were legitimate. Hobbes was categorical that the powers and authority
of the sovereign had to be defined with least ambiguity. The Leviathan was the sole source and
interpreter of laws. He was the interpreter of divine and natural laws. Unlike Bodin, Hobbes did

96 LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY