Which Philosopher is Better Suited for the People Today?

John Locke’s philosophy would prove much more useful in today’s society because it allows all people of all backgrounds to speak out and be included in their country’s decisions and it gives people the right to choose their own leaders. John Locke’s philosophy is also very much practiced in well developed countries, such as, America. Hobbes’ philosophy is very traditional relating to the government of legalism as practiced by Qin Shi Huang. In modern times, people do not like being constrained and people are becoming more knowledgeable due to the development of the internet. More people will have more opinions and it is important to listen to everyone in these times of change.

John Locke’s philosophy would work better for the modern world because it gives us the ability to hear everyone’s opinion. For example, John did not believe that the king held absolute power. In fact, he believed in enforcing everyone’s natural rights. Locke believes that our natural rights cannot be taken away from us no matter what. This is very similar to Thomas Paine’s view during the American revolution. He wrote a piece of literature named “Common Sense” which explained the relationship between people and their government. It said that people had natural born rights which the government cannot take away. Even to this day, people still remember and recall “Common Sense” by Paine, proving that John Locke’s philosophy, being very similar to Paine’s ideologies, should be adopted will by modern society.

On the contrary, Hobbes’ philosophy would only do harm to people of today. Hobbes’ believes in absolute power, where the king controls all, especially religion. However, it is shown that people are becoming increasingly less religious and ruling religion with an iron fist would do more harm than bad. People are becoming more knowledgeable with articles filled with information at our fingertips because of the internet and technological devices. With this new found knowledge people have, individuals will become more opinionated and outspoken. Also with the new years whizzing on by, we are becoming more political. Rights focusing on gender, identity, and race are now very important to our society. To use Hobbes’ philosophy is a mistake, silencing people will only make them want to scream louder.

Ultimately, John Locke’s view of the relationship between the people and their government will do better today than Hobbes’ idea. People have different opinions and perspectives; this could help our world grow more advancements and more accepting of different people of unique backgrounds. Hobbes’ philosophy may be useful in desperate times with desperate people who need order, but now, we need to work together in order to create peace and not be censored by a leader who thinks he/she knows the best for ALL of the people in their country.

Modern Day Leaders and Old Philosophers

A leader similar to Thomas Hobbes is Kim Jong-Un, the leader of North Korea since 2011. He is similar to Hobbes because he governs his country by absolute power. Kim Jong-Un censors certain platforms and skews the news to his liking, making North Korea look like the best country compared to the rest of the world, or to give the illusion to his people that he is a God among all leaders. Kim Jong-Un made laws that are extremely strict and often these punishments lead to death, showing evidence of absolute rule being practiced here. John Locke also has a modern alternative, which is, Barack Obama. He was the first black president from 2009 to 2017. President Obama was democratic meaning he listened to all people of all different backgrounds, just as Locke’s philosophy states government should be.

The English Civil War and the Glorious Revolution

The English Civil War broke out due to a violent disagreement between the Puritans and Catholics. This fight would soon lead up to the beheading of Charles II which left England with no king and the country’s people were forced into a military dictatorship. Here, in the state of their land, they were denied basic rights as human beings. This war proved to Thomas Hobbes that religious disagreements could lead to war and violence so he decided that religion would need to be heavily ruled in order for no religious outbreaks to happen. The Glorious Revolution occurred in 1688 when James II was forced to give up his throne. This event lead to Mary, James’ daughter, and her husband, William III, to rule England. The new king and queen made the parliament the major body of England instead of the King. Afterwards, John Locke’s idea of democracy, where people were able to voice their opinions, came up.

Critiquing The Criticism

The criticism for Hobbes is mostly factual and I agree with most of the criticisms because they are based off of evidence and past governments. However, the last piece of criticism is just an opinion. Even if Hobbes’ view on human nature is deemed as harsh or hopeless, he still attempts to make a government system that works for the people. For the critique of Locke, it is very similar to the criticism that Hobbes received. The first five points are understandable and are not biased. Our own nation has been through these struggles with Locke’s idea of government. On the other hand, the last point I disagree with. America will not become immoral because American society will become less Christian. People’s morals have nothing to do with religion and people who are not Christian are not proven to be more selfish or morally corrupt.

Religious Views?

Thomas Hobbes did not believe in freedom of religion. Due to this belief he wants the church and the government to fuse, making a department for religion in the government. Hobbes wants to control religion as much as possible so there are no possible wars or disagreements among the people due to religion. John Locke had a very different view about religion than Thomas Hobbes. Compared to Hobbes, Locke had a very lax perspective on religion. He felt the king did not have absolute power, therefore he believed in freedom of religion.