Is "Peace" Possible Without Subjection?
Even though this is a college paper I found over at e-IR, by a student in Singapore, I think it raises an intriguing question and posits an answer that may well disturb many.
The essay is an examination of Hobbes' Leviathan. Here is the relevant summation,
"In conclusion, the impossibility of peace without subjection, even though men understand the laws of nature which dictate peace, is due to both the conditions in the absence of a common power and the passions of men. Without subjection, not only are men willing to risk battle by virtue of their equal strength of body and mind, they suffer no restriction or penalty in doing so through any means necessary, for they possess the right to everything. Underlying these actions are those passions that incline them to act contentiously – anxiety, fear, diffidence, and a restless desire of power. There can be no doubt, therefore, that “the terror of some power” (L17.2, p. 106) – a Commonwealth – is vital to provide restraint and security, in order for men to willingly lay down their natural right in favour of the natural laws."
Is this true? Hobbes exerted enormous influence on the development of modern political thought. In a way, he raises questions regarding absolute freedom, or at least freedom divorced from virtue (a theme I frequently touch upon). His solution is the "Leviathan", the grand Commonwealth where peace is assured through security borne of restraint.
What say the audience to this?
I'm not sure what you mean by "absolute freedom, or at least freedom divorced from virtue."
In reality, "subjection" and "the terror of some power” is the polar opposite of natural rights and natural law. For who exacts the subjection and terror, and by whom do they achieve the authority to do so?
Freedom is not "the right to everything!" No person has the right to aggress against another person (or property). Call it the Golden Rule if you must.
Freedom is the natural right to be free of aggression. A man with no virtue will ultimately violate another's right to be free of aggression. But once he violates another, it is then consistent to take necessary action.
There is no need for subjection and the creation of fear. Virtue comes from within, not from law or the barrel of a gun. In fact, I'd go as far to say that subjection and the creation of fear is evil.
In Hobbes case, "those passions that incline them to act contentiously" only magnify themselves when combined with the Leviathan. Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Throughout all of human history, it is the Leviathan that is responsible for the greatest evils. It breeds racism, engages in theft, creates war, murders en masse, and corrupts everything it touches.
We once lived in the freest nation that ever existed, but look at us now ... We have a violent and abusive war on our own people (drug war for example), almost half of our daily bread is stolen out from under us, the Leviathan has burdened generations yet born with mountains of debt, and Washington DC has turned into a crime syndicate.
Reply to this