POLI SCI 31A - Intro to Political Theory

The "irrationalities" of Athenian politics before Solon

“Irrational” = doesn’t accomplish its own goals very well

Charisma

Want someone who is competent, however, that is not the system that correlates to charisma.
DIfferent people have different concepts

Rule by proclamation

If people do not know what they are supposed to be doing, they don’t know what to do accordingly.
People do what you say because they believe the ruler is charismatic, so as the charisma of the leader declines there will be less incentive to the person.

Eklesia (legislative assembly)

A democratic system and citizens partake in the right to participate in the laws of the city.
A full citizen is made up of men who owned land, their parents had to be Athenian citizens, resulting in being a part of a democratic system.
Lack of procedure, regulations, and operates only on custom.

Dikasterion (juries)

Would be tried by a jury of your peers if a citizen of Athens. A jury would consist of 201 people for minor crimes, and as many as 6,001 for major crimes.
No rules about procedure and there is no legal standard to count criminal offenses.

Class conflict

Athens was deeply divided by class conflict before Solon. Poor people lived in the hills and mountains and wanted a form of government that benefited their interests.
Wanted one person to represent all from their class because it is rich and poor fighting the political structure itself to favor their interest.
There is an idea of a mixed constitution so nobody got the upper hand and generally tries to win in the political system.

Solon’s “Rationalizing” Reforms

Wealthy and elite people in Athens, so the rich people believed that he would rule in their favor.
The poor people supported him because he was a military person and based on his charisma.
Created a more rational political and legal system as it before fulfilled the functions needed to achieve better outcomes.

Written, public law

Connected to rule by proclamation by understanding what is expected
Gives stability because it is a known legal code that is less frequently changed.

Rule of law

A way of setting the law above the king, a constitutional monarch.
The law is above the king and regulates everyone
Solon declared that “Solon’s Laws” can only be changed for him and should remain in effect for 100 years; he is still in charge and above the law.
Solon’s Laws remained present even when someone else was in charge

Broader rights of citizenship

More inclusive toward eklesia, dikasterion, and class conflict as it rationalizes the political system.
Allowed the economic development and equity for the working hands not being divided financially.

The Councils of Areopagus

Upper council:
Initiate and advise former archons
“Overseers of the state, guardians of the constitution”
Lower council (Boule):
Deliberate
100 from each of 4 tribes- staggered rotation
Connects to Eklesia in which legislates

Social policy

Solon created a public table for those who were not able to feed themselves, however this was the Archons lunch table.
If you're hungry you get a free meal and you eat lunch with the people who make the rules, so it helps society
Sons are required to support their father’s old age, unless the father never gave them an education.

Four Themes

Human Nature and Social Relations

If we think about what Solon did, he had a n intuition that Athenians were behaving badly because they had bad laws. If you had better laws, you would have better behavior. Human nature is plastic as it responds to the institutions that govern behavior and you can make people better by having better laws and institutions.

Rights and Duties

The idea that people have certain claims against others or states, that's a right. A duty is to claim certain things and those ideas are modern ideas. That new notion of citizenship that Solon was developing in Athens expanded peoples rights, but when he created the 4 classes in society and entitled everyone to participate in legislation, and opened up the communal table, those are ways a system of citizenship was used to give them new rights and new duties. He was operating with an intuitive idea by making people legal with a new status.

Role of the State

Solon understood the Athenian state was not working well. The role of the state is to perform certain functions effectively. O shape peoples behavior, avoid class conflict, keep things in order between the classes and other groups of people, and do it effectively by structuring it to do it effectively. The role of the state is to be a rational instrument for the function of the state.

Philosophical Basis

Solon was the least theoretical and he was just a lawmaker. He thinks the rationality of good laws will lead to good people and good social relations. Or have a better minority society, you will have better and rational laws. It is a theory of how the law shapes society and behavior.

Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679)

Important note: Remember underlined dates and be able to explain why they’re important

For example: The U.S. Declaration of Independence: 1776

The Rise of Modern Science

Science had been moving along for a long time, it entered people's imagination in the 17th century as becoming more aware of it.
Galileo Galilei: Italian astronomer and physicist
Galileo vastly improves the telescope: 1609
Discover four of Jupiter;s moons and the phases of Venus: 1610
Publishes Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, supporting heliocentric view, 1632
The church had a strict structure of the universe, Galileo’s theories did not correlate to that and providing evidence that the structure of the universe form the church’s theories.
Geocentric view: old, the Earth is the center of the universe and God made it that way. God created the Earth for the humans in the rest of nature and everything else is arranged around it.
Heliocentric view (with the phases of Venus): new, with the telescope, you can see shading or shadow, like the moon. Galileo noticed the same in Venus and was determined with Venu’s relationship with the sun rather than to us. Venus is going around the sun, therefore Earth is not the center of the universe.

William Harvey: English physician

Before Harvey came along, people believed that if you punctured someone they would bleed to death and nobody knew what blood was for, sometimes called vital humor.
Harvey used low-grade technology by finding someone who is willing to cut a hole, put a tourniquet, and you can stop the bleeding by pressing hard enough on the different part of the arm.
His theory was the blood was moving from one place to another and stopping the flow before it reaches the cut. The function of the body was from blood and nobody at the time knew that because they believed it was the soul.
Harvey discovers the circulation of blood: 1628

The English War

King Charles I
This is a time where England is changing rapidly and the King is not the only source of power in the country but he is trying to rule with an iron hand. He comes from a Catholic descent
His son:
Charles, Prince of Wales
Future student of Thomas Hobbes
Civil war breaks out, 1642
Parliament;s army versus the King’s army. They raised their own army and disseffected with the King enough to go against rebellion and go to war with the King
Charles I is catholic, Parliament is largely protestant.
Hobbes and Prince Charles are exiled in Paris
In 1647, the Parliamentary army captured the King and they held him for a couple of years because he was the King, and the whole idea was unimaginable. After 2 years, they cut off his head and Charles I was executed in 1649.
“Commonwealth” Period 1649-1659
England was a democratic party just for 10 years for the first time in history
Oliver Cromwell heads a (protestant) religious dictatorship and proceeded to set up a protestant dictatorship
Army declared itself the new government, military dictatorship
Leviathan published in 1651
As he was writing this book, a war was declared against the King, the rest of Europe was in a huge war, and he concluded that politics was a mess.
The rise of modern science and discovering new things to allow us to understand the world better with new methods, meanwhile, in politics it is a total mess with religious tension, Hobbes having to leave, and all of Europe is being left to waste.
Hobbes is writing the book by greatly admiring modern science and was feared modern politics and he was trying to reform politics with methods of score against the background of the chaos seen in front of him.Hobebs is developing "physics of human nature” by wanting to use those insights of scene to talk about people and the forms of politics that are appropriate for them and the way you can use politics to shape that human nature.

Chapter 3: Of the Consequence or Train of Imaginations

Hobbes studied Latin and Greek, the idea of sequence is what follows one after another. Train means to draw something or pull it and the sequencing of drawing or pulling something in trying to start a discussion of politics by talking about how someone thinks. The imagination is someone’s ideas and he wants to look at the formal structure of someone’s ideas and this train of thoughts or mental discourse is of two sorts.
One of the ways your thoughts are sequenced together are unguided without design and inconstant.
There is a whole different way of sequencing these thoughts and that is by organizing them by some desire or design. Example: Ice cream is desired right now, you have this desire that you would like to act on. Hobbes says that as humans we have this mental machinery that we aim at. You take this desire now, you project into the future, and think backwards until you come to some starting point until you can implement it in the moment. The sequence is the most important part and you have to follow all the way back in something you can do now. “Some beginning within our own power.”
It allows you to be goal-oriented, I think of something I want and I think about how I want it.
Chapter 6: Of the Interiour beginnings of Voluntart Motions, Commonly Called the Passions, adn the Speeches by Which They Are Expressed
The 7 simple passions show because they are different they have different meanings. Those 7 terms will have a bearing on how you achieve your desired object. The simple passions and they have a structure the way Hobbes is describing them.
Appetite, desire, love, ascension, hate, joy, and grief
Explaining how they work as so-called simple passions and the interpretation is like a periodic table with the simple units of matter and they correspond differently, you get different characteristics.
For appetite with an opinion of obtaining is called HOPE”
Appetite: opinion of obtaining = expectation = joy
HOPE = appetite + joy
Hope is a compound passion and projecting forward in the future is having the expectation of obtaining.
Hope is a molecular compassion with different and smaller parts.
“Aversion with opinion of hurt from the object, FEAR”
Aversion: opinion of hurt = expectation = grief
FEAR = aversion + grief
Power is your physical ability to achieve your goals, the question is do you have the ability to achieve them.

The Natural Condition

People are rationally self-intersted.

Hobbes defines human cognition and pursuing the things we like and avoiding those things we dislike. You're not interested in other people's passion and you only pursue your own direction.

People are equal in strength.

People are equal in strength so each of us is a potential threat to others. Equal enough to threaten each other.

People are equal in prudence.

Prudence is a technical idea and the way you learn from your experience. We go along through life figuring out how to do things by observing patterns, and as long as you're motivated by your passion for things you can learn from them.
Fear is the sensation of wanting something, in this case, not wanting it with displeasure combined with the hurt from the object and it would be bad to not have it in the future. We are naturally self-intersted, one of those passions is the fear in the future that you won;’t be able to satisfy these passions.
Everyone is equal in strength, or if you are more clever, but everyone learns from their experiences that may lead to expectations of hurt.
Chaos is building any society that has those characters and he is trying to use physics to solve the problems of politics.
He gives us a way of explaining things like war, violence, and tries to give us these simple passions with certain cognition and people are built that way with the natural outcome referring to this.

Alone on a Desert Island

(row, column) = Cesar, Kamala

Kamala

Cesar	Farm	Farm + Steal
Farm	(1a) 3,3	0,5
Farm + Steal	5,0	2,2 (1b)

The process of decision making these people would go through if they had the psychology Hobbes said they had.
In this situation, it is rational for them to pursue an outcome that is not the best possible one. The rational choice is not the best choice in theory, and there are better choices. It is rational because of the situation.
If we take an assumption that he makes about the natural condition, you wind up with a bad decision, and you do not need to assume that people are evil by nature, just assume they are rational and seek out the satisfaction of their own pleasure.

Chapter 14: Laws and of Contracts

There is a right of nature, natural law, and the idea is every person has a natural right by their own liberty and power to preserve themselves. Around Hobbes' time, there were people opposing the King because they had a natural right to liberty. He is saying that they have a natural right to self-preservation and it is your own bodily power to preserve yourself.
Redefines liberty to impeach the King and it has become a very material concept.
The law of nature is a precept or general rule, found out by reason. We have a reason that traces out the train of imagination that helps you best to find your passions. The only law of nature is the only one that is built into nature, and the passion for self-preservation.
Law of Nature ↔ Right of Nature (1a + 1b)
If trying to preserve yourself, you need to guard yourself now before other ways harm you.
Preserve yourself by seeking peace, but, when you cannot obtain it, use your physical energy to be able to preserve yourself.
(5) You realize being prudent and rational, that seeking peace is threatened by everyone’s liberty and their right of nature. So, your reason tells you that the same applies to everyone else, you should be prepared to set aside the right to all things. Set aside your natural ability to hurt other people, reason says only if other people are willing to do the same, otherwise it would be irrational to do that. Set aside your right of nature for the sake of peace.

Chapter 15: Of Other Laws of Nature

(1) Men perform their covalence in vain. You make an agreement with other people not to harm them against them, to not use your natural aggression, then Reason tells you that if you are serious you should keep that agreement.
(20) Do not insult, do not behave aggressively toward others, and aggressive behavior will get you in trouble. When people are insulted, they will fight rather than consider safety. They throw down their natural law and you should reconsider their safety.

The Natural Condition

People are rationally self-interested

To get rid of natural self interest for Hobbes, there is not really a change as people are wired that way.

People are equal in strength

Hobbes believes in taking equality to change it.

People are equal in prudence

This involves people to show themselves truly through different scenarios.

Sovereign Power

(row, column) = Cesar, Kamala

Kamala

Cesar	Farm	Farm + Steal
Farm	3,3	3, -10
Farm + Steal	-10, 3	-10, -10

State of nature → Civil Society (→: The social contract)
The way to get out of these problems is to form an agreement to found a society. Locke is going to call a society a political civil one. There was a civil society because there was a King. The people make a contract among themselves (chap 14-15) but create an administrative means to stick to that agreement.
Picture Model
In a sense it shows the control of the people through the sword with a monarchy series, yet, the accommodation of taking care of the people with the sheep sword.

Chapter 17: Of the Causes, Generation, and Definition of a Commonwealth

(1) Prudence and rationality says that is not enough, natural law does not do enough, the commonwealth with absolute sovereignty does the most.

Chapter 18: Of the Rights of Sovereigns by Institution (by being instituted as a sovereign)

Sovereign Authority

Subjects cannot change the form of government.

You don't have the power to change the government once you change the sovereign. If the sovereign is superior to everyone in his ability to suppress them, you cannot change the form of government. The sovereign can change it if it fits his needs, but you can’t. The social contract is not a contract between the citizens and the sovereign , it is formed among the citizens themselves as we will all lay our right of nature or self defense.

The minority must capitulate

When the social contract is formed, it is an agreement among people. If a minority of people don't agree the rest is justified in enforcing them into the agreement. You're forcing them to set aside the same thing that everyone else is and to not be a danger to other people, forcing them to give up their natural right. The self interest in people in majority inclines them to do this, and you can force the minority to do it.

The sovereign cannot be accused of abusing his authority.

There is no such thing as abusing authority and the charges made against King Charles I. He was abusing his authority by being an absolute monarch and if the sovereign could be accused of abusing his authority then there could be situations where their authority is limited. If it is limited there are ways that you have power over him, you the citizens can make the claim, as soon as that happens the sovereign does not have equal strength and it is back to natural law.

The sovereign may do whatever he deems necessary.

He is self necessary and when he does satisfy his actions it may be good for the citizens and the subjects as well. Absolute authority

Chapter 21: Of the Liberty of Subjects

We the people have these customary rights to people and this chapter asks if they were taken away.
Liberty = freedom from constraint
Free to misbehave, choose enemies, freely because there is no constraint.

Chapter 29: Of Those Things that Weaken, or Tend to the Dissolution of a Commonwealth

Things that weaken the commonwealth

Lack of absolute power

Unequal strength of the sovereign. Equality of strength and that is what makes you have to worry about other people. As soon as the sovereign has people of equal strength they are in the same natural strength.

Dividing the sovereign power

It was okay if the King had power over the parliament, but once the parliament had the same power there was a division. Once the parliament had the same powers they wanted to make laws too. Instead of having an absolute monarch (sovereign), maybe have different categories that prove the state of nature.

Rule of Law

The King does not rule in an absolute sense, there is a law over the King. Regulation when the sovereign can imprison you, term of office, not allowed to murder people, or taking stuff without a purpose. An example of number 1, anytime there is a rule of law there are constraints on absolute empowerment. Hobbes is constantly arguing against the changes in his society and he wants to go back to his old system with modern ways to do it.

Giving citizens rights against the sovereign

Right to remain silent, and the sovereign cannot compel you to speak. First Amendment right, right to free speech, is right to free political speech. It is a right against sovereign and free to political speech. If citizens have rights against the sovereign there are things the sovereign cant do, there is a lack of power.
He considers the things that can go wrong and it shows the right to authority. There is a logic that gives you this result as you have to have one person that has overwhelming strength over anyone else.

Four Themes

Human Nature and Social Relations

Human nature (chap 3, 6) hobbes feel human nature is rational self interest, equal in strength and prudence. Social relations (chap 13) the view of social relations is one in which you need power now because you are afraid you will not have it in the future and leads to competition and conflict and your social relations are ones that life is solidarity. The view comes from his view of human nature

Rights and duties

You have a right of nature to protect and preserve your own life. It is a right that you are a large muscular animal and you can protect yourself. The law of nature says do not use it all the time because it creates conflict. The law of nature gives you a set of duties, keep agreements made, don’t insult others, and those natural laws are duties.

Role of the State

The role of the state is to stabilize people's expectations about other people’s behavior. Life in the state of nature is bad because you don't know what to expect, expect the worst from people. WHat the state does is it stabilizes what to expect, you only care about the sovereign and one person to think about. The sovereign is predictable because they are pursuing their best interest. Reduces state of fear by making the challenge much simpler.

Philosophical Basis

At bottom, see number 1. It's Hobbes theory of human nature, if people are those three things, human nature is really like that you need a state. Human nature really drives everything else, it is the motivation.

John Locke (1632-1704)

Early Life

London, England
Christ Church College, Oxford and became a professor of logic

“Commonwealth” Period (1649-1659)

Oliver Cromwell heads a (protestant) religious dictatorship
Only period in history where it was democratic lifestyle

“The Restoration” 1660

Charles II is crowned in 1660, restoring the royal line
When Charles went into exile, he was hanging in the French court (cousin relations), during the height of the French war, and Hobbes tutored him

Founder of the Carolina Colony 1663

Anthony Ashley Cooper First Earl of Shaftesbury
Supported Charles II restoration as King
Charles II makes him a governor, Carolina Colony, and is given the right to run that place for their own profit. One of the ways Shaftesbury showed his political restoration was raising tobacco, cotton, and making a lot of money in the new world.

John Locke

Personal physician to the Shaftesbury household, 1667

Shaftesbury is Lord High Chancellor 1672-1673

Locke is appointed Secretary to the Council of Trade
In charge of the colonies and the growing British empire that started from the Carolina colony and drafted the constitution the states of Carolina and Maryland.

Late 1670s

Charles II shows signs of age and sickness
Shaftesbury is making millions of money from the colonial trade and the King is restraining him because he is thinking that he should be in charge. Economically, these people have more economic power than the King and there is a start of tension.
Catholic (protestant) King, Shaftesbury (protestant), and Locke (protestant)

Who should succeed Charles II as King?

His brother James, Duke of York?
Succeeding because he does not have any official children with his queen, however, he has other children roaming around.
His "illegitimate" son James, Duke of Monmouth?
That is why the term “illegitimate”, because a wedlock, and is a friend of Shaftesbury and Locke.

“The Exclusion Controversy” (1679-1681)

The plot in favor of James, Duke of Monmouth is crushed by Charles II
Shaftesbury is thrown into prison
Locke escaped to the Netherlands
Goes into hiding in the Netherlands under an assumed named pretending to be a doctor

King Charles II (brother of Charles II) crowned in 1685

A catholic king married to a catholic queen
Produces a male heir, James, in 1688

Plot created

A plot is organized by Whig friends of Locke and Shaftesbury
James II is told to abdicate the throne…
…naming his daughter Mary and her husband WIlliam as successors
William, prince of Orange (Netherlands) is protestant

“Glorious Revolution” (1688-1689)

King William II
Queen Mary II
“William and Mary”

John Locke’s Story continued

John Locke is the “house intellectual” of the Whigs
Publishes Two Treaties of Government in 1690
Defines limits of royal authority and grounds for deposing a King

The State of Nature

State of nature → civil society

→: The social contract

The civil society is the product of an agreement that is a contractual state and is formed by what comes to be referred to as a social contract.
They come together, form an agreement, and the basis of the agreement forms a new political organization of society.

Chapter 2: Of the State of Nature

(4) The first characteristic of the natural condition is that people are naturally in a state of perfect freedom. The ability to order your actions and dispose of your possessions, and your person yourself as you think fit within the bounds of natural law. A state of equality wherein all the power and jurisdiction is reciprocal. A state of equality, equality between people, and it's a state where the power and jurisdiction among them is reciprocal. No one having any more than another, “Nothing could be more evident” this is known by reason and clear to thought.
This is controversial because the doctrine until this time, had been known as the doctrine of natural sovereignty or natural right of Kings. And the idea there is the King is not the same as other people, the King rules by a divine institution from God. The King has a divine right to rule as King.
The idea of primogeniture is that the King’s eldest son or eldest child, tells you who is entitled to rule and makes the King different from everyone else.
(6) We learn that the state of nature has a law of nature to govern it, which obliges everyone. Reason is the law of nature and teaches you that because people are all equal and independent, given that, freedom and equality, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty, or possessions. You have a natural right to have your life, health, liberty and possessions protected by natural law. Not only is your life scared, but your health, liberty, and respect that freedom, but your possessions are part of this. Your possessions are a part of your life and sense that they help sustain your life. For your life to be preserved, your possessions must be protected. (God)
Reason also tells you when your preservation comes not into competition with the following, you should do as much as you can to preserve the lives of others. Preserve yourself first, then preserve the life, liberty, health, limb, of others if it doesn't threaten your own self-preservation. You have a duty and responsibility to preserve yourself and the lives of others, that includes the duty to preserve your own possessions and preserve the possessions, life, liberty, health, limb, and good of others. In the state of nature you have the responsibility to protect others and the only time you could make an exception to that is doing justice to an offender.
The law of nature extends to not just self-preservation, but the preservation of other people as well.
(7) It is true that the law of nature is known by reason, and there is not institutionalized power to enforce it, but that doesn't mean it won't be enforced. Every person in the state of nature has a responsibility to enforce the law of nature. So the execution of the laws of nature is in the state and the state of nature put into every man's hands and everyone has the right to punish the transgressors of that law. Locke is saying that everyone knows this by reason and they have the physical ability to enforce it as they should. And because this is known by reason is going to come to the same conclusion of natural law. Therefore in the state of nature, you should do that so you do not need to wait for someone else to enforce natural law because you have the ability to do it yourself.

Property

Second Treatise- Of Property

(26) If God gave the earth to men in common, that means they have property in common. If it is not your property then you can't use it. It would be illegitimate to take things from the common store of goods if they weren’t yours. You need a title, you need property.
(34) The Earth was created for all men in common, but that wasn't the end of God's intention, God meant for it to be used as your labor to the title of it. He is saying this is what natural law is teaching you and it is a rational argument.

Two Theories of Property

Property by appropriation

Industries is your title and you can go to the common stock of goods created by God for all mankind. You can appropriate, take things out of nature, and make them yours. When you do that, you acquire a title to the, they become your property. Laboring on those raw materials is your title and that is what makes the difference with combining our labor with raw materials so they can become different and become your property. Reason told you that you can take things out of nature to use for the best advantage and convenience of your life.
Spoilage Qualification: In a sense that anytime you exceed the bounds of what is useful, when you take them out of the state of nature. Spoilage is kind of the paradigm case but there would be other cases as well. Anytime you take these objects out and they aren't useful for human life, you don't own them anymore. You lose your natural law title to ownership and your property title. Essentially, puts limits on property by appropriation because it qualifies the property life that you get from this theory.
Subsistence Economy: You can collect as much as you need out of nature for your life and your conveniences for the betterment of your life. In a sense of what promotes the good of life itself. You can acquire that much stuff and no more. There is a certain production of goods in this state of nature, so its economic in essence and this production of goods is enough to satisfy you and no more.

Property of exchange

Natural law teaches you by reason, you have perfect liberty,and you have this beauty to possess things. And, you are also equal to other people and this equality is reciprocal. The ownership of the things you have acquired to appreciate and they are yours because you are free. You can dispose of your possessions as you see fit, it is an aspect of your freedom and you have dominion over your object. Your freedom allows you to give things to other people and that is all governed by natural law. The other person also has the freedom to give you things and because we are on this equal reciprocal footing, you can give someone something in return for something they own. That person is free and you are equal and you can come to an agreement in reciprocal. Natural law governs the form of the agreement itself. When you exchange those items, you're exchanging them on the condition that they become the other person's property, and that is an aspect of the other person's property.
Primitive Market Economy: We preserve private property by transferring it between one another. It’s a market economy in the sense that a market is a forum of exchange so we are making deals. It is a primitive market economy because we are trading one object for another and there are no uniform currencies, just the exchange of concrete objects. You have to produce everything you need for your own subsistence. Now with this division of labor, you can specialize in the task that you are best suited for, and trade or exchange for all the other needs.
In the state of nature people will notice that there are some things in this common stock of goods that are attractive for their own characters. Everyone likes them and wants them, if you are able to appropriate them in the state of nature you can exchange them, however, these things are beautiful in their own sake and they are small minerals. These products don't spoil and because they are desirable they are something that is always exchangeable.
Money: This universal medium exchange is a kind of universal currency. It has these miraculous properties of storing value, making it possible to mobilize that value at any time. Not being limited by natural law and not limiting your property rights. It's not “money” that is politically created and not governed by laws. It is a precious metal that function in the same way and goes the same exchange and going through the same medium exchange
Market Economy: You have one commodity and one thing that can be exchanged for everything else. In a sense that you can dislocate your trades, exchanges, through time, you can store value, mobilize value. Money rends itself in an abstract that creates a true market economy, This is not limited by the spoilage qualification, there are no limits in this money you can pile up.

From the State of Nature to Civil Society

Chapter 8: Of the Beginning of Political Societies

(95) People are by nature free and equal and because of that no one can be removed from this state of freedom and equality except of their own consent. It has to be through agreement or contract and that is the only way that bonds of civil society can be placed on a person. They are agreeing to unite in a community for comfortable, safe, and peace of living. The movement from the state of nature to civil society through the social contract has to be voluntary and it's for the sake of comfort, safety, and peace. The contrast shows where they remain free and there is no problem with that. The people who join this new body politico, create an incorporation in which the majority have the right to make decisions.
(119) You are giving you silent and implicit consent whenever you enjoy any of the fruits of the government. Hence the government does anything for you, provides a services, protects, or guarantees your safety, You are in effect tacitly or silent consenting to this and whether it is a piece of lodging or traveling on the highway, anytime you enjoy the benefits of government you are effectively signing of to the social contract. Civil societies are the same way as there is natural law, reason, and still see how nature governs their actions. Civil society will always be governed by reason and natural law and there will be the civil laws as well.

State of nature → Civil Society

Ruled by reason Ruled by reason

(natural law) (natural law)

↖ State of war ↗

Not ruled by reason

(violates natural law)

↳ When you have a conflict, people violating natural law, what you have is not a state of nature. When people begin to act unspeakable, they return to the state of nature. When people are engaging in conflict and not seeking peace they are violating natural law and violating the rules of rules. They are not in civil society or state of nature, they are in what Locke calls state of war. The state of war is not ruled by reason and it violates the natural law. It is a state of conflict and the violation of the law.
(124) The reason for leaving the state of nature and entering a civil society is the preservation of your property. There are many things in the state of nature, like their wants and established, settled known law.

State of Nature Civil Society

- Natural Law - Natural + Positive Law (Law that is put in place by people)

↳ Legislative function

- Partial Judgement (Bias) - Impartial Judgement

↳ Judicial function

- Executive Power - State Power

↳ Executive function

(125) The problem is trying to figure out how the law is applied in specific cases. The idea is having to make a judgment on how abstract the law is to fit certain cases. The problem is we tend to be biased over our own cases. The solution is to have a known and indifferent judge and no stake in the matter and they have no biases.
(126) You're in the state of nature, there is no state of authority to protect you, it is dangerous and frequently destructive to those attentive if you want to attack someone attacking someone else. The state of nature has certain distortions and biases and the civil society corrects those.
Locke notices that people have certain needs and they need somebody to judge and enforce that law done in the state of nature, imperfectly. Civil society improves on that with a positive polish. Locke realizes that we need some kind of lawmaking function of some sort.
(127) Civil society is free of biases and Locke is saying the inconveniences of nature is you are not gonna wanna be there for a long time and proxy is gonna drive you to a civil society, with the hopes of protecting your property.

Locke versus Hobbes

Comparison with Hobbes state of nature

Contrast: state of nature ⧣ state of war

Locke makes a distinction between those things. The state of nature is to some extent the precursor of civil society. For Hobbes it is the opposite of civil society. It exists to preserve your life and peace. For Locke, the state of nature and civil society look very similar, civil society is transmission of the state of nature but civil society does it better.
Hobbes calls the state of nature and the state of war the same thing. Hobbes equates those two, whereas Locke separates them.

Similarity: Natural law is interpreted as self-preservation

Both of them tell you natural law is aimed to preserve yourself. For Hobbes it is about seeking peace and for Locke it is self-preservation.

Contrast: Natural law is extended to the preservation of others

Locke is a bit different; natural law includes the self preservation of others. For Hobbes it is every person for themselves. It is the case that it will be good to cooperate but in the state of nature it is not possible. Locke thinks the oppositions

Contrast: Natural law is enforceable

Hobbes told us that natural law is not enforceable, it can't be instituted or upheld in the state of nature. Locke says it is and everyone has the executive power to enforce natural law in the state of nature.

Contrast: Now property is now part of the “self”.

Hobbes simply talks about self preservation and seeking peace. Locke makes property of the self that you have to preserve. Your property is an intimate of your self preservation. Hobbs never said that and only talk about your bodily integrity

Contrast: Private property and money exist in the state of nature

In order to have property to be part of yourself it has to be the case you have rhythm in the state of nature,there is a title and locke gives you that title with private property. Hobbs does not think that and thinks that what is yours can be defended by yourself there is no natural law titled to private property if you're strong enough to defend something then it is yours.

Contrast: The state of nature extends to authoritarian governments.

Hobbes says the state of nature is the opposite of government and the opposite of authoritarian government. The sovereign for Hobbes is what ends the violence and instability of nature. Locke equates those two things and he says the state of nature and authoritarian government are the same thing and it puts people back in the state of nature. He aims it at Hobbes in (90) Locke says that if you have an absolute print, then it is not true that there is an impartial judge who can appeal for a judgment with no raises. And it is not the case that there is a known authority that could impartially input the injustice of that print and it is going to be immune to those judgments. The sovereign in hobbs is completely unruled in law.

Comparison with Hobbes’ civil society

Citizens have ultimate sovereignty

Locke's the power of the citizens once they form society legislative power and that is the ultimate standard. Hobbs says the sovereign and the absolute ruler has power.

Government is limited

Locke is clear that the government is limited and the power. He puts checks on absolute authority (135) in the state of nature against the citizen you always need to limit the power. Hobbes (chap 29) you never want to limit the power of government and you need absolute power in order to maintain the authority of the government.

Citizens have rights against the government

Locke states that citizens have the right to have known established laws, taxation can occur by consent, and legislative power over authority, these are laws created against the government. Hobbs says that this weakens the government and threatens to dissolve it.

Rule of law

Locke is clear that citizens united in a social contract constitute the legislative authority. The legislative authority for Locke is supreme, the government is ruled by it. The citizens are ruled by the laws that they created and there is a rule of law for Locke (136-142).

Government is conditional

The legislative power is the supreme power and it must preserve the people and their property (149). If the government fails to perform that function, and the trust then citizens have the right to dismantle it and government is always conditional. Hobbes (chap 29) thinks the government can never be conditioned and you are obligated to be governed by the sovereign and have no more say in the matter.
Locke says citizens have the rights against government, government is conditional, and limited power.

Limits to the Legitimacy of Government- Locke

Usurpation
(chap 17) A kind of domestic conquest and the case where you have a government with a civil society and there is a waste of rules about who runs the government. Someone who is not entitled by the rules takes over the government and proceeds to rule. Is not the legitimate ruler, but the form of government is still the same and Locke points to the great importance of the government. Some people could be declared illegitimate heirs to the throne, they would then be considered usurpers and others would not be.
Tyranny
The ruler goes beyond the rightful limits of ruling. Where the form of government has changed itself. A tyrant can be the legitimate ruler who decides to declare martial law, dissolve the congress, and ignore the rights given, and rule by absolute proclamation. That is a tyrant because they exceed his or her authority and go beyond what the form of government allows and exceeds the functions of the government.

Four Themes: John Locke

1. Human Nature

People are naturally free and naturally people. Have rights to natural self-preservation, and property, like money or something that looks awful like money. Social relations are not so bad in the state of nature, not as bad as Hobbes, and social relations should be ruled rationally and they only become bad when they are irrational.

2. Rights and Duties

Right to the preservation of yourself and your property, there are corresponding duties and Locke says you should preserve the life of yourself and others that should not harm others.

3. Role of the state

To provide laws, and the means to judge, and execute. The state should fulfill three functions legislative, executive, and judicial, so it is that idea of function and Locke has the idea of the state and state of nature need to do certain things or certain people and you need these three branches of something to fulfill that function,

4. Philosophical Basis

Locke's ideas about human nature and particularly rationality. Human nature, the law of nature and natural condition, he describes it in a way that generates everything else.

Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778)

Background

Compare American Revolution (1776)
Rousseau is born in the free republic of Geneva (now part of Switzerland)
Free republic, democratic city state
Rousseau’s mother dies after childbirth
His father is a watch-maker with pretensions to nobility
The father flees the law, abandoning Rousseau at age 10

Livelihood

Rousseau becomes steward of the estate of Lousie-Eleanore de Warens
She is modern and free-thinking: separated from her husband, the Baron de Warens
Rousseau composes a popular opera (1752) and becomes an important music critic.
Rousseau published Julie, ou la Nouvelle Héloïse in 1761
Rousseau publishes On the Social Contract in 1762
↳ Compare: American Revolution, 1776, French Revolution, 1789

Whats missing in Hobbes and Locke?

No account of political unity

Both use this notion of sovereignty, for Hobbes the sovereign is the person dn absolution monarch. Locke is the legislation power of the citizens coming together in a contract. Each of them both start in this position. You have these people in this state of nature and they are individuals that are free and equal, but they are alone and isolated. Somehow, the social contract transforms them into sovereignty, that implies a collective unity about people coming together. There is an agreement, there should be a politically unified society, and this notion of unity is being questioned by Rousseau. Isolated individuals in the state of nature become transformed into a totality.

No coherent idea of popular sovereignty.

In the state of nature, each person is sovereign; there is no one who can tell you what to do. Somehow, after the social contract you are supposed to end up in collective sovereignty, beautiful you don't have political unity, you don't have that.

No criteria of legitimacy

Hobbes and Locke try to give you an idea when a government is legitimate or not. The sovereignty can never be abused of its power; it will not threaten the legitimacy of the sovereign. For Locke, you have legitimate and illegitimate, but Rousseau would say this would not work, there is no way to explain how this sovereignty is formed through these people.
State of nature → civil society

The social contract

On the Social Contract: Subject of the First Book

(1) Man is born free and everywhere he is in chains describes how clear people who describe themselves as master of others are a slave more than they. There is a change that happened that people were born free but now chained. You are born free as a baby and everywhere you are in chains now, that would be literal. He had a thing of innocence for childhood as people become wise about the world, it corrupts them. Suppose this is about the generic indicator, in their original state they were born free and now they are in chaos, a state of nature in this civil society. If you take this into a political state, we don't know how it moved into a civil society but there can be a set of conditions of a politically organized society.
“Find…”: This begins to sound like we are going to explain the legitimacy of a social contract. It is going to be a form of association and it will define and protect each person and their goods. He is describing if you have a form of association and it sounds like Loke protecting people in their property, and yet you are as free as you would be in the state of nature and that is a form of legitimacy. You have all the benefits of civil society and the state of nature, or the social nature or some version can give you both of those things at the same time. That is setting the bar really high because he is saying absolute freedom and all the protection of civil society in one package.
“If, therefore,...”: The term general will, chooses Rousseau's idea of the social contract is surrendering your natural freedom and looks like Hobbes. Here you place your person and power under income and supreme general wealth. Rousseau means by general wealth is unclear but it is clearly the main idea of the book.
“At once,...”: The people who are contracting parties, formed the social contract, create an association which is an oral and collective body composed of all of it as individuals. However, that collective receives from this act of association, its unity, its common self, live, and will, it forms something collective as a result of this contract. He calls it a public person, so you have a composite and this association acts with one will in a unified way even if it's composed of multiple members.

Chapter 7: On the Sovereign

(1) Forming a contract with yourself, as opposed to signing an agreement that is made with another person it has a meaning. Each person has a truthful commitment as a member of the sovereign and the state for the sovereign. As a member of the sovereign to private individual, you have a commitment. He has this back and forth dichotomous movement across these passages and there are different kinds of relations between these things. This idea that there is a reciprocal commitment with public individuals and private individuals. Commitment is a promise, so a member of the sovereign is the “citizen” and this means a citizen to the private individuals, and a member of the state to the sovereign.
(4, pg. 26) “In fact..” The general will is something you have as a citizen and it is different from private will. “Thus, in order…” If you refuse to act on your commitment, to obey the general will you can be forced to, but it is forcing you to be free. We're going to force you to do something, but it means you will be free.

Chapter 3: Whether the General Will Can Err

(2) There is a mathematical and Rousseau enjoyed how that sounded. The private will head off in different directions, switch their own interests and they might conflict, so those conflicts will remain in the private domain. If we forget about that, what is left over is the sum of differences.
(6) “The general will to be really such…” His ideas were second nature to him and the general will to be really such is a general will to fundamental nature. It must be general in its object, the idea here is it is one of action. The general will is acting on something, which is its object. The general will is not this nice object, it is an agent that does things to other things. If the general will is gonna be general, it has to be by nature, general and it has to act in a completely general way and the thing it acts on has to be general. It must derive from the essence of nature; it has to be derived from all people. The general will is applied to all and it loses its natural rectitude when it loses its general will.
(6) “Thus…” It alters its nature and essence, so if the general will is going to be truly general, it cannot render decisions on man state affairs because they would be particular objects. The general will is going to have something to do with political unity and the government and it cannot render decisions on individual people and states of affairs because it would be singling out particular people or cases and it would not have a general object. It is becoming clear, the general will have to behave in a general way, it is not doing the daily business of the government.
(7) “But what then is a law?” If anybody was particularly attached to the idea of natural law, like Hobbes and Locke, Rousseau is dismissive, there is a notion of law you can discover by reason. Natural freedom and natural equality can be said but it can't help you set up a state. If the general will choose a particular object, the generality of the general will become fragment and it is not a whole, it is an unequal part. Neither of them is general, so the consequence is a man of state affairs.
(7) “But when entire populace…” Now it is the populace and all of the people together. The entire populace is the essence of the will and general will, it is acting on something, itself. The entire populace makes laws that is governed by them.

Good will = Good people

Any active legislation that good people produce is not going to be good as well. You wind up with a paradox and you're stuck. Rousseau tries to make a resolution. “He who dares to undertake…” What you need is someone who is, so to speak, in a position to change human nature and transform each individual. How do you get isolated individuals to the general will, you have to find someone unable to change human nature.
“The legislator is in every respect…” There is a vicious circularity, it seems people are stuck in their self interest and you need someone to transform them. It creates a legislative process that eliminates the plus and minus, it helps the citizens of Athens that have good laws and perpetuates itself. The people declare themselves free and independent, Rousseau doesn't think it's gonna work because they are the wrong type of people since they don't know how general interests look. He has the idea that laws shape individuals behavior and interest and they can reshape the dynamic of laws. Human nature is improvable and through lawmaking you can shape human nature, otherwise your people will remain self-interested.

Chapter 17: On the Institution of the Government

“The problem is to understand…” Creating the general will cannot act on any individual person or state of affairs. The general will cannot create it because of its individual states of affairs.
“The peculiar advantage…” We can have a democratic government and that solves the problem and the general will act on the public.

“Sovereignty” “Democracy”

Sovereign (general will) → general law → [democratic] government → leaders, new forms of government, specific laws
“By the second…” A law according to him has to be completely general, it is a particular act on a consequence but not something they did. The sovereign creates this idea of government of a form or another, as soon as you name leaders its not an act of the general will because it is not general in its object.
“Moreover, it is here…” This remarkable property of the body of the politic is that the citizens can change their relationship to one another and it is remarkable because they can convert sovereignty into democracy. You pursue your own interest and get what you want, naming leaders is not in the common interest. It shafts from the common good to the public interest. The general cannot do much and all it does is create democratic government and then everyone goes to become a democratic citizen and make self interested choices. The citizens are always sovereign together and that the general will forms a way for the government to act.

Four Themes: Rousseau

Human Nature and Social Relations

Rousseau thinks that people are naturally free and naturally unequal. He thinks that people are naturally sovereign over themselves, so that is the basic picture of isolated nature. He thinks that human nature is changeable so people can overcome their self interest and exercise their sovereignty together.

Rights and Duties

Rousseau comes close to reciprocal commitments and he does not want to talk about rights and duties, only committees to people.

Role of the State

It is the delegated authority of the pope. The state can act in specific ways that in which the people cannot but it is not sovereign, only the people are sovereign.

Philosophical Basis

The idea of the sovereign and change the way they think to use tier sovereignty together.

Date Author Lecture Topic/Reading Assignment

Week 1

March 31 Introduction to the course—no reading

April 2 Plutarch “Solon,” from Parallel Lives (100-120 CE) web

Week 2

April 7 Thomas Hobbes Leviathan (1651), chaps 3, 6, 13

April 9 Thomas Hobbes Leviathan, chaps 14, 15

Week 3

April 14 Thomas Hobbes Leviathan, chaps 17, 18, 21, 29

April 16 John Locke Second Treatise (1690), chaps I-VII (p. 7-51)

Week 4

April 21 John Locke Second Treatise chaps VIII-XIII, XVII-XIX (p. 52-

83, 100-124)

April 23 Thomas Jefferson “A Declaration by the Representatives…” (1776) web

Bhikhu Parekh “Liberalism and Colonialism” (1995) WB)

Week 5

April 28 Jean-Jacques Rousseau On the Social Contract (1762), p. 17-66

April 30 Jean-Jacques Rousseau On the Social Contract, p. 66-80

Benjamin Constant “The Liberty of the Ancients” (1819) web

Week 6

May 7 Immanuel Kant “Transition from popular moral philosophy” (1785) web

Week 7

May 12 Immanuel Kant Metaphysics of Morals (1797), p. 41-62

May 14 Immanuel Kant Metaphysics of Morals p. 62-75

Week 8

May 19 Immanuel Kant Metaphysics of Morals p. 92-94, 97-123

May 20 Research project due, 20 May, 5:00pm

May 21 Karl Marx & F. Engels The German Ideology (1846), p. 39-57

Week 9

May 26 Karl Marx Preface to A Critique of Political Economy (1859) web

May 28 Karl Marx & F. Engels The German Ideology, p. 57-95

Week 10

June 2 Charles Mills The Racial Contract (1997), p. 9-89

June 4 Charles Mills The Racial Contract, p. 91-133