How Does Hobbes Have A Perfect Government

In Leviathan, Thomas Hobbes writes about the construction of a commonwealth and expresses what he believes are the essential characteristics of a perfect government. Hobbes contends that a strong national government can help citizens escape the brutal state of nature. In doing so, people must mutually give up certain powers and freedoms and delegate them to a centralized power, thus providing the basis of a social contract. In return for the populace giving up certain rights, this established power would provide protection and establish order (Hobbes, 17.13). Curiously though, Hobbes contends that a social contract applies solely to the citizenry (Hobbes, 18.4). Stated another way, the established power in which the citizens defer power to is not beholden to the same social contract as the people. In the following paper, I will address why a recognized government must be beholden to the same contract as the citizenry. Hobbes lived most of his life in the 17th century, a century that witnessed significant civil unrest in England. Leviathan was Hobbes’ attempt to convey what he believed was the perfect government, a government that would avoid the state of nature from becoming a reality. The ideal government, according to Hobbes, should be headed by
a leader who was not beholden to the same social contract as the one amongst the citizenry (Hobbes, 18.4). However, if the government charged with protecting the public and creating order is not obliged to follow the same social contract that the populace must follow, then the same social contract is less effective in creating a largely peaceful and sustainable commonwealth. Charles I ruled England from 1625 until his execution in 1649. With Leviathan being published in 1651, Hobbes likely attained many of his political ideas from analyzing England under the rule of Charles I. Within his timeframe as king of England, Charles I managed to accrue a hefty national debt, regularly quarrel with parliament, and also exacerbate tensions within England that led to civil war (Hobbes, pg. xlix-1i). In essence, since he was not beholden to the public, King Charles I was able to exercise unchecked power regardless of what the community wanted. With the virtually unrestricted actions of Charles I largely leading to civil war within England, it is peculiar that Hobbes did not envision his perfect government as one that was considerably more tied to and limited by the community that it governs. As mentioned above, the actions of King Charles I helped intensify issues that led to civil unrest in England.
There are striking similarities between Hobbes’ state of nature and civil war. Civil wars are largely characterized by brutality, disorder, and widespread death. These characterizations of civil war are similar to Hobbes’ contention of what the state of nature looks like: brutal, disordered, rampant with fear, and full of self-interested people capable of murder (Hobbes, 13.9). Yet, even though Hobbes witnessed what can happen when a monarch rules without any covenants with the public, he did not deem it necessary for a monarch’s political and societal policies to be held formally responsible by the
populace.
If a monarch is allowed to have unchecked power, then a social contract amongst the citizenry can be easily negated and features of the state of nature can appear within society. For instance, it was a common practice in the past for monarchs to kill people for a number of reasons, such as religious dissention. This practice draws similarities to Hobbes’ state of nature, which is inhabited by citizens that murder those they view as threats or whom they disagree with. Therefore, in terms of Hobbes’ idea of a perfect government, it would be pragmatic for the sovereign to have checked powers and to form a covenant with the people it governs in order to better prevent the state of nature from appearing. Otherwise, the sovereign is bestowed with too great of power that can lead to society sharing similarities with Hobbes’ state of nature, the same state that Hobbes sought to avoid through his depiction of the perfect government.