The modern political theorists do not always play by the rules. Today, the democratic credentials of contentious politics are highly indecisive although some political scholars believe that this type of politics tends to have insufficient respect for the democratic decision. Arguably however, the main tasks of any state include provision of security, development of a diverse and stable-reform oriented economic class, and unifying the populations through education. The three views, which conform to Machiavelli and Hobbes political reasoning, are in support of a political reform that focuses on the most achievable goals which are against the conventional thoughts that aimed towards the achievement of the greatest good for the population. Citizens are obliged to respect the rule of law as advanced by the political leaders, and those in positions of authority are obliged to ensure the citizens are adequately protected.
The aim of Machiavelli and Hobbes for Politics
Both Machiavelli and Hobbes are political realists who believed that the foremost role of the state is to provide security for its citizens. As such, the state is supposed to be strong and powerful so that it can withstand the internal and external challenges to its rule in an effort to protect the citizens. For example, any civil or international warfare is considered as a threat against which the requirement for political order is affirmed. The scholars are of the notion that security is the foundation for all other citizen’s expectation. The implication of this assertion is that the state needs not be virtuous or exercise justice, since the two aspects end up undermining the quest for security. Relative to the traditional view of political reforms, the realist arguments by Machiavelli and Hobbes consider the attainable goals which in this case is ensuring that citizens are protected from internal and external transgressors, rather that the greatest good which considers security, justice, and virtue combinations for an effective political regime.
Machiavelli for example, tells the prince that he should only focus his attention on policies that can save his state from destruction. In this case, politics involves the use of determined and pragmatic power that is inconsiderate of moral precepts. According to Strauss (2017), Machiavelli intentionally and consciously lowers the aim of politics in the effort to justify a realistic pre-eminent goal – the basic need for security. Although Machiavelli is not concerned with democracy in the modern sense, the author defends the political power and the worth of the common populations. Machiavelli believed that constructive conflict is necessary for the citizens to enjoy liberty and social status in the political order.
On the other hand, Hobbes is popular for his claims that the natural human condition is of war and all populations fight against other populations. Hobbes is considered one of the major influencers of contentious politics. The scholar viewed conflicts as antithetical to adequate democratic politics (Boucher, 2018). For Hobbes, the main purpose of politics is to escape war and thus offer the citizens protection from aggressors. As such, in order for the people to establish democratic order, they must subject their will to a single point of authority, in this case the political class. As such, citizens are supposed to accept all the determinations of the politicians even if they felt that they are against their wishes. The ideal democracy of Hobbes is such that citizens have some recourse if they disagree with the ruling power. Although citizens are allowed to offer counsel to the state they should not let their interests drive their demands since that would lead to exhortation.
How the Aims Impact the Obligations and Responsibilities of Ordinary Citizens
Hobbes denied that man is naturally social and political and believed that nature disassociates men from its elements. Disconnected from nature, the man develops fear of violent death which he considers s the determining factor in his entire life on earth. The fear for death is what motivates man to come up with methods for peaceful coexistence with other people, who according to Hobbes are also afraid of dying through violence activities. Hobbes is of the suggestion that man should ensure he is secure and combine efforts with other people for other self-preservation initiatives with the final goal of establishing a social contract (Pocock, 2017). Man however contracts with only what he views to be good for himself and his need for security. All men should be equally skilled to kill each other since self-preservation is the main goal of each person. Eventually, men find ways to respect each other with regards to needs and desires. As such, the ordinary citizens are obliged to respect the authority of the state by adhering to the rules and regulations that are aimed at fostering the wellness of all people.
According to Hobbes, citizens accept authority as it is the only means through which each man avoids death by way of violence. However, the ordinary citizens are supposed to offer ideas to the ruling political party but should not impose their will or demands as that would be considered extortion. As evidenced in the modern day society, the U. S government for example consists of politicians that are representatives of different states and populations of the country. The elected members channel the expectations of their citizens to the government but they cannot impose on rules that are not universally accepted to all populations (Wolin, 2016). The citizens are responsible for electing representatives to the government and they are also obliged to respect the enacted legislations since they serve to ensure that they are protected from instances that would lead to death by violence, which according to Hobbes is the determination factor of the political regime and motivates the people to accept authority.
If the political regime was such that people were free to protest and join efforts to overturn the democratic decisions at will, the system would not be considered a pure rule by the citizens but rather a rule that is distorted to please the protestors, who are not representatives of the entire population. As such, the view by Hobbes is for people to respect and accept authority and the succeeding rules and regulations for a stable and democratic system. In view of Machiavelli thoughts, citizens should demand justice but if the state denies it, they should oblige since the political regime is in place to ensure that security is provided for all populations.
How the Lowered Aims Affect Obligations and Responsibilities of those in Positions of Political Authority
Machiavelli believed that it is better for a leader to be feared than to be loved in case he lacks the two personality traits. The claim is however considered in a pragmatic point of view. The scholar further associates the success of political leaders to the use of brutal methods and violence in governing the people and if possible, leaders should aim to be held merciful and not cruel by the citizens. Although Machiavelli places great importance on the use of necessary violence, it is evident that he considered glory over cruelty in prince’s life when he asserted that a person cannot be said to be just when he kills fellow citizens. As such, leaders should be reasonable in exercising their powers so that they are able to advance security to the people without causing unnecessary pain.
On the other hand, Hobbes is of the notion that political leaders are also subject to laws and if the rules do not provide the required security, the citizens have the right to resist the sovereign. However, Hobbes believes that leaders are most concerned with their private interests and as such, the public interests are more closely linked with their private affairs. Hobbes therefore supports a monarchy form of government since it is well-placed to protect humans from the nature.
In light of the political thoughts by Machiavelli and Hobbes, political leaders should pursue the interests of the citizens by establishing law and order (Johnston, 2017). The ordinary citizens have subjected their will to the political regime and as such, it is upon the government to ensure that the populations are protected at all costs.
In any political regime, past or present, there are always powerful people who influenced the policy making process, and in most instances to their interests. In the view of Machiavelli, people can only attain their own freedom if they are united in contesting the power and influence of their leaders. The reason for this assertion is that the powerful always try to bend rules through the already established channels for their own self interests. However, although the citizens may have a legitimate need to be engaged in the democratic process, their differences may disrupt the status quo of the nation. In the view of Hobbes, persistent protests and contentious politics imply a weak and deficient political regime. The scholars are in support of a contestatory political regime in the effort to end the influence of the powerful and the rich (Runciman, 2018). Nonetheless, the end goal of each regime should be to protect the citizens by all means possible with the implication being that the achievable goals, in this case, security, should be the main obligations and responsibilities of those in political authority. The citizens on the other hand should support the government and accept the established rules and regulations for their own survival.
2019-3-5-1551823553