social contract, in political philosophy, an actual or hypothetical compact, or agreement, between the ruled or between the ruled and their rulers, defining the rights and duties of each. In primeval
times, according to the theory, individuals were born into an anarchic state of nature, which was happy or unhappy according to the particular version of the theory. They then, by exercising natural reason, formed a society (and a
government) by means of a social contract. Although similar ideas can be traced to the Greek Sophists, social-contract theories had their greatest currency in the 17th and 18th centuries and are
associated with the English philosophers Thomas Hobbes and John Locke and the French philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau. What distinguished these theories of political obligation from other doctrines of the period was their attempt to justify and
delimit political authority on the grounds of individual self-interest and rational consent. By comparing the advantages of organized government with the disadvantages of the state of nature, they showed why and under what conditions government is useful and ought therefore to be accepted by all reasonable people as a
voluntary obligation. These conclusions were then reduced to the form of a social contract, from which it was supposed that all the essential rights and duties of citizens could be logically deduced. Theories of the social contract differed according to their purpose: some were designed to justify the power of the sovereign, while
others were intended to safeguard the individual from oppression by a sovereign who was all too powerful. According to Hobbes (Leviathan,
1651), the state of nature was one in which there were no enforceable criteria of right and wrong. People took for themselves all that they could, and human life was “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short.” The state of nature was therefore a state of
war, which could be ended only if individuals agreed (in a social contract) to give their liberty into the hands of a sovereign, on the sole condition that their lives were safeguarded by sovereign power. For Hobbes the authority of the sovereign is absolute, in the sense that no authority is above the sovereign, whose will is
law. That, however, does not mean that the power of the sovereign is all-encompassing: subjects remain free to act as they please in cases in which the sovereign is silent (in other words, when the law does not address the action concerned). The social contract allows individuals to leave the state of nature and enter civil society, but the former
remains a threat and returns as soon as governmental power collapses. Because the power of Leviathan (the political state) is uncontested, however, its collapse is very unlikely and occurs only when it is no longer able to protect its subjects. The social contract in LockeLocke (in the second of the Two Treatises of Government, 1690) differed from Hobbes insofar as he conceived of the state of nature not as a condition of complete license but rather as a state in which humans, though free, equal, and independent, are obliged under the law of nature to respect each other’s rights to life, liberty, and property. Individuals nevertheless agree to form a commonwealth (and thereby to leave the state of nature) in order to institute an impartial power capable of arbitrating disputes and redressing injuries. Accordingly, Locke held that the obligation to obey civil government under the social contract was conditional upon the protection of the natural rights of each person, including the right to private property. Sovereigns who violated these terms could be justifiably overthrown. Get a Britannica Premium subscription and gain access to exclusive content. Subscribe Now Locke thus stated one of the fundamental principles of political liberalism: that there can be no subjection to power without consent—though once political society has been founded, citizens are obligated to accept the decisions of a majority of their number. Such decisions are made on behalf of the majority by the legislature, though the ultimate power of choosing the legislature rests with the people; and even the powers of the legislature are not absolute, because the law of nature remains as a permanent standard and as a principle of protection against arbitrary authority. Do we have the right to overthrow our government? The Declaration of Independence says that we not only have the right but we also have the duty to alter or abolish any government that does not secure our unalienable rights, including life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Given that the U.S. was formed by settlers who threw off British government rule, there is also an historic precedent for overthrowing the government. In Episode 5 of the six part series on America’s founding below, Rochester Institute of Technology Professor Sarah Burns explains that the message of the Declaration of Independence is that we – as a free people – have the right to
stand up to an oppressive government. This was – and in many cases still is – a radical idea. But it is based on the philosophy that people have rights that no government can grant or deny. According to John Locke, the fountainhead of this philosophy: There is no difference between an unjust government and a thief. Just like we are right to fight off a thief, we are right to fight off an oppressive government. What do you think about this argument? Leave your comments below.
Are you interested in hearing more about pro-liberty ideas and solutions to real-world problems? If so, LibertyCon International, Students For Liberty’s flagship event, is an occasion you won’t want to miss. Held in Miami, Florida, on October 14-15, 2022, this two-day conference offers attendees an opportunity to connect with other liberty-minded individuals and engage with our fascinating lineup of speakers. If you’d like to attend LibertyCon International in Miami this October, be sure to click on the button below to register and book your room with the discounted rate. You can use the code LEARNLIBERTY for 50% discount on your tickets! We look forward to seeing you there! This piece solely expresses the opinion of the author and not necessarily the organization as a whole. Students For Liberty is committed to facilitating a broad dialogue for liberty, representing a variety of opinions. Share this blog postWhat was John Locke's philosophy about government?In politics, Locke is best known as a proponent of limited government. He uses a theory of natural rights to argue that governments have obligations to their citizens, have only limited powers over their citizens, and can ultimately be overthrown by citizens under certain circumstances.
What did Thomas Hobbes believe?Thomas Hobbes believes that humans have no moral compass unless there are predetermined rules to say what actions are good or bad. There is no morality in the state of nature. There is no contract without an absolute power to enforce it. Therefore, justice only comes into existence when the sovereign is established.
What did Thomas Hobbes believe about the government?Hobbes believed that a government headed by a king was the best form that the sovereign could take. Placing all power in the hands of a king would mean more resolute and consistent exercise of political authority, Hobbes argued.
|
