capitalism

Thomas Hobbes

What does he believe about human nature?

In his famous work Leviathan (1651), Hobbes took a profoundly skeptical view f human nature, arguing it was ruthlessly egotistical and likely to commit cruel and destructive acts. Hobbes also asserted that, prior to the emergence of the state, there was no cooperatin or voluntary arrangements between individuals and therefore none of the natural rights later cited by liberals. Instead the Hobbsian state of nature was a place of scarce resources where individuals would be driven by unflinching self-interest. Human nature was thus shaped by a relentless desire for the acquisition of goods, an immoveable distrust of others and a constant fear of violent death. In Hobbes own words, life in this state of nature would be ‘solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short’

Instead, what kind of government did he want?

In leviathan, 1651, he defended absolutist government as the only viable alternative to anarchy and civil disorder. He famously portrayed life in a stateless society - what he called the state of nature - as a brutal “war of all against all”, rted in his belief that human beings are fundamentally self-interested, competitive and driven by a driven by a desire for power. In such a condition, without an overarching authority to maintain order, life would be chaotic and insecure. To avoid this, hobbes argued that individuals should enter into a social contract, surrendering theor natural freedms to a svereign authority in exchange for peace and protection. Importantly, Hobbes did not justify this authority through the divine right of kings, as earlier theorists had, but through a rational and secular framework, making his work a pivotal moment in the development of modern political philosophy. Once established, this sovereign power must absolute and indivisible, as any attempt to limit goverment authority risks a return to the state of nature.

what did he think about the ordered society?

An ordered society, according to Thomas Hobbes, must carefully balance the human desire for freedom with the necessity of authority and control. Hobbes believed that human beings are inherently needy, vulnerable and easily misled in their efforts to make sense of the world around them. In his seminal work Leviathan, he contended that the only way to avoid social collpase and violent conflict was though near-total obedience to an absolute government. For Hobbes freedom without the stabilising presence of order and authority would inevitably lead to chaos and destruction. To illustrate this he constructed a thought experiment known as the state of nature, a condition in which all individuals are equal and free , unbounnd by any political or moral authority. While this might seem ideal from a modern perspective, Hobbes argued that unrestrained freedom would bring out the worst in human nature.

Edmund Burke

What did he say about French Revolution and its society?

Edmund Burked viewed the French Revolution as deeply flawed because it sought to construct an entirely new society based on abstract and untested principles such as liberty, equality, and the rights of man, rather tahn grounding political change in historical experience and inherited traditions. In his seminial work, reflections on the revolution in france, Burke warned that abandoning long-standing institution, customs, and values in favour of radical innovation was both reckless and dangerous. He argued that these lofty ideals, while appealing in theory, were not firmly rooted in French society and lacked the cultural and institutional support needed to make them sustainable. As a result, he believed the revolution was doomed to descend into violence, instability and eventually tyranny.

how did he view the state?

Edmund Burke viewed the state not as a machine that could be dismantled and rebuilt at will, but as a ling organism. Just as a plant must be carefully tended, pruned and occasionally grafted to ensure its health and growth, Burke believed that society and government shoulve evolve gradually and organically, rather than being subjected to sudden and radical change. In his view, political reform was sometimes necessary, but it had to be approach with caution, respect for tradition, and a deep awareness of historical continuity. For Burke, meaningful and lasting change could not be imposed from abstant theories or ideological blueprints, but had to be grounded in practical experience - what he called empiricism. This meant learning from the real outcomes of past decisions and adpting in way that preserved the acculated wisdom of previous generation.

his views on tradition?

Edmund Burke believed that inheritance and tradition formed the essential foundation of a stable and enduring society. He argued that the instituitons, customs and beliefs that shape society are not arbitrary creation, but the result of accumulated wisdom and and practical experience passed down through generations. For Burke, this historical legacy must be respected and preserve , as it embodies the knowledge of those who who came befre us. He warned that discarding this inherited order in the name of abstract principles, as was attempted in the French Revolution of 1789, would invetibaly lead to chaos, tyranny, and the collapse of social cohesion - as evidenced, in his view, by the violance and instability that followed the revolution in france. Burke advocated for continuity and gradual change, asserting that “change is only necessary in order to conserve“.

Ayn Rand

What is Atlas Shrugged about

In atlas shrugged, Ayn Rand argues that society collapses when it punishes inidivudal achievement and rewards need. She promotes her philosophy of objectivism, which holds that reason, individualism and rational self interest are the highest values. Rand rejects altruism and collectivism, claiming that people live for their own sake and that capitalism is the only moral system because respects individuals rights and freedoms. Through the story of productive individuals withdrawing from a society that exploits them, she illustrates that destructive consequences of government control and the moral superiority of personal ambition and free enterprise.

what does she think of the state and its programs?

Ayn Rand rejected government welfare and wealth redistribution programs because she believed the state enforces these through the implicit threat of force, compelling individuals to contribute via taxation This opposition to external coercion is central to her philosophy and is known as the non-agression principle , which holds that no one should initiate force against others. Additionally, rand condemned personal altruism - the idea that individuals should prioritise others’ well-being over their own - arguing that it creates artificial obligations that conflict with rationalself interest.

what does rand think about society?/atonement

Rand became associated with the New Right’s atonement, the term for a society defined by millions of autonomous individuals, each independently seeking self-fulfillment and self-realisation. The concept views individuals as basic building blocks of society, operating according to their wn values and decisions rather than being shaped by collective goals or social obligations. Indeed, Rand’s work provided a strong philosophical justification for the idea that society does not exist in any meaningful r practical form as an entity in itself, rather, it is simply a loose connection of self-reliant , independent individuals whose primary responsibility it is to themselves. She rejected the notion that individuals owe a moral duty to the community or state, instead arguing that genuine progress and human flourishing come from personal freedom, self interest and the pursuit of one’s own rational goals.

Robert Nozick

Robert Nozick argued that the only morally justifiable state is a minimal or nightwatchman state, whose sole function it is to protect individuals from violence, theft and fraud. This position is rooted in the principle of self-ownership, a concept with origins in the liberal thought of John LOCKE. self ownership hold that individuals own themselves - their bodies, talents, labour, and the products f their work - and therefore have the exclusive right to control how these are used. Nozick used this idea to argue against taxation for welfare programs, which he saw as a violation of individual rights. From his perspective, such taxation forces idnividual to give up a portion of their labour for the benefit of others, effectively making welfare recipients partial owners of the taxpayer - an arrangement he likened to a form of slavery. Because of this, Nozick believed that state has no moral authority to interfere in personal choices or regulate individual behaviour, such as how people eat, drink, or smoke, as doing so would infringe on the individuals right to ownership.

what else does he talk about in Anarchy, State and Utopia ?

In Anarchy, State, and Utopia, Robert Nozick challeges patterned theories of distributive justice, such as those that seek to distribute resources according to principles like equality, need or merit. He argues that patterned distribution requires constant interference with individuals to transfer their holdings as they choose. To illustrate this Nozick presents his famous wilt chamberlain argument, where he imagines a society with a perfectly equal distribution of wealth. he argues that this outcome is just because it arose from free, voluntary exchanges - yet maintaining the original pattern that requires unjustly interfering with these choices.