Hobbes Leviathan Response

Hobbes's Leviathan

I find Hobbs's discussion on the establishment of a commonwealth interesting. However, I am not convinced that the two ways in which he describes the rise of a commonwealth to be equal like he does. I agree with the argument of the establishment through institution (agreements, contracts) that he discusses. The other method he discusses is through acquisition or force. The first example shows in a chronological manner how humans can develop from a state of nature to form a commonwealth. This is essentially his description of establishing the Leviathan. The other method, through acquisition, means that a force takes control over a group of people. I must disagree that a "sovereign" instituted by force is as much a part of the social contract as a "sovereign" instituted by agreement. While both share a similar function of protecting society and securing peace, I fail to see how society is to fall into a role of support to a sovereign instituted by force. In the case a sovereign instituted by agreement, all rights are transferred from the individual to the sovereign, except for the right of self-preservation. These rights, in this scenario, are willingly transferred in exchange for security of society. In the case of the sovereign instituted by force, I do not think that the individual should forfeit all of his/her rights because it is not by their will that the sovereign is in place.

Why should individuals owe the sovereign sole loyalty without hope of being freed from obligation when the sovereign's rise to his position was against the will of the individual to begin with? Also, later on Hobbes goes on to explain how he thinks that monarch is a more successful system with power residing with one individual. When someone becomes a monarch through force, his will is not the same as the individuals. While his policies may be consistent because he is the only one making decisions, I would argue that civil war is more likely due to decisions that would be controversial, as the individuals agenda would likely be different from that of the sovereign.

Leviathan