Hobbes and Community

In his political treatise Leviathan, Thomas Hobbes makes arguments for the state of the world and humankind and for a way to make them better. He argues that in our natural state, we look out for our own interests. The world cannot sustain us each individually, so we are in a constant state of war/insecurity. However, when we form groups, those who could only survive alone can begin to thrive; working together feeds human development. To escape the state of nature, these groups agree to surrender their individual rights to a sovereign who protects them from other groups and from the world.

When we must surrender all of our individual rights to gain physical protection, this presents problematic possibilities and risks. This is what we tend to talk about when we talk about Hobbes: what will go wrong when we lose our individuality. These conversations are relevant and important, and they present good reasons for why concentrated power in the hands of one person or a few people is not a good idea. However, there is something simple and beautiful about one of Hobbes’ premises. He argues that when we are alone, our lives are nasty, brutish, and short. Together, we make each other better, and we empower each other to go beyond the basics. I disagree with Hobbes about many things, but not about this. Community is key to reach eudaimonia, or thriving.

The ideas that Hobbes presents in his Leviathan have been extremely influential and have impacted the way classical liberals think and the principles on which the United States government was founded. Human equality, natural rights, and consent of the governed were new ideas when Hobbes wrote them. We have used them to create something better than Hobbes would have, but we can still thank him.