The Power Of Equality

Barker's Notes

- (A) The difference between Rousseau's and Hobbes' 'natural' men is that Rosseau is harkening back to the primitive man, whereas Hobbes envisions 17th century man, and how he would react if the entrapments of civilisation completely vanished. Therefore I think its a bit unfair to compare one with the other.

- (B) I'm not sure if nakedness and lack of medicine are really assets to the savage man, though I can understand how the savage is no doubt stronger than the modern civilian (if less cultured).

- (C) I was left thinking that the savage man will also not have any concepts of freedom/morals. The more complex ideas we have of freedom and morality are human-generated constructs, in tandem with the human constructs of the sovereign/ruling government.

- (D) Considering how peaceful the Rousseau's state of nature is to Hobbes', it's interesting how Rousseau's formation of the state through revolution is a lot more violent than the social contract's desire to promote peace in the Leviathan. It's almost like Hobbes decided to flip that book on its head.

- (E) Just as fear was the 'good guy' in Leviathan, leisure is the 'bad guy' in A Discourse On Inequality. Which makes sense, as I rarely get fearful (or feel like I'm a productive member of society) while I'm watching old episodes of Flying Circus.

- (F) This book should have ended with a 'to be continued....' as I was left thinking it'll be interesting to find out what solutions to this state of inequality Rousseau has in mind, though apparently that's sorted out in his Social Contract. 

Hobbes' Leviathan vs. Punk Rock

Alternate title:

I Knew Hobbes Was Trouble When He Walked In (Trouble, Trouble, Trouble)

Needless to say, my understanding of Hobbes before yesterday's lecture was minimal at best. I get it a bit more now, but still, I reckon if you want some actual enlightenment on the contents of this book, it'd be best to scroll down to the blog post below mine.

Whenever faced with the intellectual demands that a comes with a book like Leviathan, my mind inevitably shifts to something that doesn't require thought, like punk rock. But then, with a flash of minimal inspiration, I realised that when Johnny Rotten sang

"I am an antichrist, I am an anarchist"

he was talking about the direct opposite of Hobbes' State = God analogy! The Sex Pistols, therefore, must have been scholars of the Hobbesian variety, and with their decree of destroying passersby, Johnny Rotten was fully acknowledging that sudden and violent deaths would result form his anarchistic ways.

The band Crass, on the other hand, promoted anarchism and pacifism as ways of life, saying things like

"External control are you gonna let them get you?

Do you wanna be a prisoner in the boundaries they set you?"

but also telling the embittered 'common man' who wishes for a bloody revolution that

"freedom has no value if violence is the price

Don't want your revolution, I want anarchy and peace."  

Hobbes, however, wouldn't be too happy with Crass. He'd say that the 'boundaries' (which involve fear) are necessary, and that violence is only other outcome.

Indeed, I think the idea of Hobbes getting cosy with any anti-capitalism and anti-establishment music from the likes of Fugazi or Refused would have been a definite no-no. What he would have thought of The Buzzcocks' 'Orgasm Addict' though, still remains to be seen.

Hopefully I'll have an even better grasp of this book by the end of the week. I wonder if any reproductions of the book have ever been attempted with a more modern vernacular and clearer arguments. I'm sure I'd enjoy reading that a whole lot more, as it's hard to follow Hobbes' traynes of thought when his now outdated diction gets in the way.