Political Science

Niccolo Machiavelli, Thomas Hobbes and John Locke are three different thinkers who existed in different times but they all had tremendous influences on the creation of the US Constitution and the US governments character today. Their varied views on human nature and the purpose of government helped the Founding Fathers of the United States craft the present constitution that we know. Though each thinkers philosophy and political beliefs have their merits, we lean toward the view of human nature that humans are generally reasonable, but when confronted with hostile situations, they may tend to act badly. Our view has more in common with Locke who posited that human nature is the law of reason and that the government exists to preserve peoples humanity and punish those who violate the natural law. We are for limited government, that is, a government that only acts to enlarge our freedoms and not restrain us. We believe that a conservative government that leans more toward libertarian and goes back to the original function of the US Constitution would serve our lives better and make us better citizens.

Niccolo Machiavelli, famous author of The Prince, a concise political treatise, The Art of War, about military science, and other influential political writings, is widely remembered today as a thinker who believed that deceitful strategies and cunning should be used to preserve the status quo. The Prince especially is a work of great significance because it features realism as opposed to the popular philosophy of idealism at the time of its writing.

Machiavellis writings had a huge influence in the creation of the US constitution, especially through John Adams, the first Vice President of the United States who eventually became the second President of the country, and one of the Founding Fathers. In his Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States, Adams applauded Machiavellis realism and his revival of reason in government matters (Diggins 73).

Apparently, Adams learned a good deal from Machiavellis work and he used that knowledge to contribute to the crafting of the American Constitution. Machiavelli particularly believed in the propensity of men to act in their own self-interest. Adams agreed to this philosophy and even called it a kind of self-evident truth, which is one of the pillars of his politically system. However, Adams didnt stop at accepting everything Machiavelli believed in. He criticized and analyzed Machiavellis writing to squeeze out valuable knowledge from it that could guide Americas constitution.

Instead of agreeing with Machiavelli that the deeds of humanity are inscribed in destiny, Adams imputed the selfish actions or iniquities of men to imperfect and unbalanced constitutions (Diggins 73).  Thus, the solution to the weakness of other governments is not the peoples development of a civic virtue or a meaningless striving to be good citizens, but crafting a balanced constitution that will give everyone a chance to fight for their aspirations in government. Taking from Machiavelli and a host of other historical sources, Adams simply didnt believe that virtue moves men. Ambition is the greatest mover of mankind and such ambition has been the cause of downfall of many governments before. But with a proper constitution to keep that ambition in check, a government can work more effectively and last (Diggins 72-73).

Just as Machiavelli devised strategies to keep the Princes power, Adams thought of ways to preserve the aristocracy and keep the fervent democratic attitudes of people in check. He criticized the dominant view of humanitarian psychology of his time that men were good by nature and they can be trusted to treat their fellowmen justly. He showed the long history of mens cruelties and misrule to prove his point. He insisted that whoever founds a state or creates laws should presume that all men are naturally bad, and that they will never fail to show their powerful greed when given the opportunity (Parrington 312).

The danger with this natural tendency to be ambitious and act selfishly could lead to the destruction of society. Since if aristocrats are allowed to act as they see fit, they will oppress the masses, leading to a revolution. When the masses acquire power, they will in turn be oppressive toward aristocrats if their power is unchecked. Thus, there will never be an end to the transgression of peoples rights. To solve this problem, Adams promoted and glorified the system of checks and balances which, in its evolvement today, is used by the United States to limit the power of every branch of government. Adams proposed that the Senate be the aristocrats voice, while the House of Representatives be the masses voice, and the Executive be the arbiter. Of course, while this idea is untenable today, it shows how Machiavellis concept of human nature influenced Adams to defend the American system of the separation between the Executive, Legal and Judicial branches of government.

Thomas Hobbes is one of the most influential political thinkers of all time, particularly because of his formulation of the social contract theory. According to Hobbes, without a government that would regulate peoples actions, people would be in a state of nature where everyone has a right to all resources, which results in a brutal conflict or a war of all against all. Life would be very difficult and many people will die as a consequence of this unbridled anarchy. Key to Hobbes social contract theory is his concept of human nature, where all human beings are animalistic by nature and act only in their own self-interest without regard for their fellow human beings.

Hobbes solution to this problem was the establishment of a sovereign authority to which people would subject all their natural rights in exchange for peace.  Through this process, a civil society is formed and everyone is protected by the sovereign authority. However, people should accept any abuses by the authority as the price for attaining peace, so the power of this sovereign authority is absolute. Hobbes rejected the separation of powers and forwarded the belief that the sovereign authority should control all civil, judicial, military, even ecclesiastical powers.

Hobbes writings were influenced the creation of the US Constitution in that it directed attention to the importance of consent in any type of society (Bruyn 39). Todays American government gives high regard to the consent of people, such that the government cannot tap into the personal conversation of a citizen, for example, because of the individuals right to privacy. The Founding Fathers couldnt have known the importance of such a right had they not been familiar with Hobbes concept of the sovereign authority in a civil society.

According to Hobbes, there should be no standard by which the sovereign would be judged by the people. The sovereign is absolute therefore, it alone can and should determine the ends and means of any societal goal (Cox 48). For society to work people should surrender all their rights completely and they must trust the government to represent their wishes in all its actions even though they havent given it any consent.

Hobbes concept of the sovereigns power is so absolute that he wont even allow any voting to transpire. In addition, the sovereign cannot be subject to any kind of law, whether conventional or natural (Cox 49). It is understood that since people have surrendered all their natural rights to the sovereign, the sovereign carries the will of civil society. The sovereign therefore should be the only one who would determine the means and ends of a course of action. In exchange, the people will get the security they want from the government.

Todays government borrows from Hobbes notion that people should be protected by the government, though it doesnt have any of the tyrannical powers that Hobbes ascribed to it. In many ways, the Founding Fathers created a constitution that corrected Hobbes useful, insightful but tyrannical theories. Instead of unquestionable authority, the US government is by the people and people elect the authorities that govern them. Instead of the unification of all powers, the US constitution commanded the separation of the state and church to instill no metaphysical power to the government.

The writings of John Locke, the Father of Liberalism, have far-reaching influences in various fields of knowledge. In terms of political science, Lockes work has several similarities with Hobbes though with starkly more humanistic sensitivities. Like Hobbes, Locke believed that without government, people would be in a natural state where all are independent and equal and everyone had a right to defend their life, health, liberty and possessions. The fundamental difference with Hobbes though is that the natural state for Locke is governed by peoples reason. Thus, the law of nature is the law of reason and people are free to decide what is right and what is wrong through their reason (Abele 3). Reason is the rule among men and anyone who places another under his control is unreasonable and therefore merits the punishment of that man and others.

Defending such natural rights and possessing reason though, is never enough because chaos would result if everyone defended their natural rights. Reason itself dictates people to preserve humanity (Abele 3). To solve this conflict, people enter into a social contract that establishes a civil society, and from a state of nature, people move into a state of society which is better. Unlike Hobbes though, Locke supported the separation of powers of government, which would later inspire the system of checks and balances of the US government, thus the separation of the executive, legislative and judicial branches.

In addition, Lockes belief that revolting against despotic rule is not only a possible consequence of tyranny but also the obligation of the people in a civil society is the inspiration behind American citizens right to group together and fight the government and other unjust authorities. Its obvious that unlike Hobbes, Locke fully realized that the government is answerable to the people which built it through the social contract, and therefore must provide them with good service or be brought down.

In many ways, Lockes philosophy is the main foundation of the US constitution. The Founding Fathers of the United States took several rights from the English Bill of Rights of 1689, including the right to petition the king (US First Amendment), the right to bear arms (US Second Amendment), and the prohibition of excessive fines and bails and unusual and cruel punishment (US Eighth Amendment). Locke, who was am English native, wrote the Constitution of the American colony of North Carolina in 1667 together with Earl of Shaftesbury and Lord Ashley.

North Carolinas constitution written by Locke, as well as the philosophers Two Treatises of Government would enormously inspire the Founding Fathers of the United States of America, particularly George Mason, James Madison, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson. Jefferson would later use Lockes idea of the natural law of human beings and their natural rights to craft the Declaration of Independence of the United States (Abele 2). Even today, Lockes political ideas continue to guide lawmakers in the US government in creating legislation for the nation.

Niccolo Machiavelli, Thomas Hobbes and John Locke all have valid points, which should be taken into consideration when evaluating our present government. First, while Machiavelli pushed for a despotic tyrannical rule, he was right to be wary of the danger of giving the people the right to seize power. John Adams interpretation of Machiavelli and his assertion that there will be unending conflict between aristocrats and the masses is very useful in our understanding of democracy. Both the wealthy and the poor in society have rights and therefore, a democratic government must be careful not to give one an unreasonable edge over the other otherwise, despotism or anarchy can develop.

Hobbes also deserves significant credit for recognizing the danger of doing without the government. Indeed, history shows that men tend to act selfishly and even be brutal toward their fellowmen without a proper form of government regulating their actions. Hobbes absolutist government though, is too radical and it is just right that US government shunned many of Hobbes radical ideas. Instead of perpetuating peace, Hobbes ideas when implemented will only lead to more chaos and more people suffering.

Lockes ideas have the most merit because of their foundation on reason. Our view of human nature resonates with Locke as we believe that people are generally reasonable, but when confronted with hostile situations, they may tend to act badly. To us, a reasonable person is a good person, and as with Locke, we believe there is nothing wrong with defending our life, liberty and property. We believe that everything good is reasonable and everything reasonable is natural, and therefore, people who act irrationally are the only ones who commit evil acts. These people are the only ones who deserve to be punished by the government.

Since people have the natural capacity of reason, we do not need the government to tell us everything that we have to do. We know for ourselves what makes us happy and what makes us safe from others harm. Therefore, in our view, the US government should be more conservative, not gigantic in proportions as it is today. We lean toward the libertarian view that individual thinking and freedoms should be promoted and not restrained by various government policies. We need to go back to the original function of the US Constitution and that is the perpetuation of our right to protect our life, liberty and property.

We cannot have the government interfering too much with our lives, since as reasonable citizens, we already know what to do. We only need the government to safeguard us from unreasonable members of society who would do us harm. We also need the government to punish these individuals or rehabilitate them. Like Locke, we define an unreasonable individual as someone who unreasonably subjects his fellowman to his power, and not due to the need to defend his life, liberty and property. If we remain true to the original function of the US Constitution, our government will serve us better.