Hobbes and NATO

            In Leviathan, Hobbes discusses man’s competitive nature. Since human beings have a tendency to want, the conflict that plagues mankind is expected. “So if any two men want a single thing which they can’t both enjoy, they become enemies; and each of them on the way to his goal (which is principally his own survival, though sometimes merely his delight) tries to destroy or subdue the other.” (Hobbes).  He says that in order for peace to ensue men must reach an agreement to abide by common laws. In chapter 13, Hobbes says that it is not man’s fault that he behaves recklessly and unreasonably for this is his natural state. Until man realizes the good social contracts provide the people and the state, any attempt to enlighten him is useless.

The desires and other passions of men aren’t sinful in themselves. Nor are actions that come from those passions, until those who act know a law that forbids them; they can’t know this until laws are made; and they can’t be made until men agree on the person who is to make them. But why try to demonstrate to learned men something that is known even to dogs who bark at visitors - sometimes indeed only at strangers but in the night at everyone? (Hobbes)

Humans have been in perpetual war since the beginning of time, at least as far as I know. However, there are incidents where we have also seen man prevent and end war through negotiation and social contracts. One example is the formation of NATO, which was established after WWII. The United States and 11 other nations came together to form this body to prevent the spread of communism and form a collective defense against soviet expansion and threat, especially against NATO members.

If men limit their power, it is only by fear from another power, which is greater than their own (coercion). This limitation is said “rational”, for it comes from calculation and leads men to self-preservation. Since there is no guarantee of life in the state of nature, men consent to put an end to the state of nature and enter into society. (Bilba)

Even though the U.S. was and has been considered the strongest military force in the world, it is also powerful because of the relationships it has established with other countries. Hobbes said that while some men are stronger and quicker, those who aren't would have other strengths. “The weakest man is strong enough to kill the strongest, either by a secret plot or by an alliance with others who are in the same danger that he is in.” (Hobbes). The U.S. is successful not only because of its economic and military strength but also through the relationships it has formed with strategic allies, especially NATO which has now 29 members including former members of the USSR.

In order to escape man’s natural state of conflict Hobbes said contracts would be needed as well as an a ruler (or an assembly). Upon joining the collective defense, NATO members agree to abide by certain principles and laws, and follow the command of appointed leaders. As Hobbes suggested, the mutual agreement has deterred conflict between NATO members, and non-NATO members, allowing for peace to grow.

References

Bilba, C. (2016). Hobbes: A Realist and a Liberal?. [online] Metajournal.org. Available at:
http://www.metajournal.org// articles_pdf/15-review-bilba-tehno.pdf [Accessed 13 May 2018].

Hobbes, Thomas, and C. B. Macpherson. Leviathan. Baltimore: Penguin Books, 1968.


Comments

  1. EHMay 17, 2018 at 6:08 PM

    I completly forgot about Hobbes' line on treaties after my first read-through of the book. What an interesting way to bring Hobbes around to a point applicable to today's global socio-political structure. Do you think he would put more faith in allies, like you mention here, or a global 'sovereign' structure (like the UN but with more teeth?)

    ReplyDelete
  2. AnonymousMay 18, 2018 at 6:07 PM

    Perhaps military structures are a much better fit for Hobbesian theory. As you suggested here, NATO does fit the bill in some respects. You have an organization based entirely on self-defense and survival. This organization also has a strong sovereign power at the top (one which is not democratic and has fewer restraints than typical politics). One army has the capability of destroying another if it can enter into smart alliances even if it is the underdog (American revolution). Interesting comparison! Thank you for sharing.

    ReplyDelete
  3. UnknownMay 21, 2018 at 5:38 PM

    Hobbes’ view on international relations can be taken from the realist international anarchy perspective or the world state perspective. Ultimately though, I think, Hobbes points out a rationale of multilateral cooperation and institution-building among states to the utmost possible degree. NATO is a good example of this multilateral cooperation, where concern for collective security binds everyone together.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Anarchy in the USA

           While discussing realist motives and intentions, it seems that the United States is headed down a curious path worth looking at. Clearly a powerful nation, the United States should be in a unique position to latch onto globalization in order to secure a stable future. Calm, cool, collected domination is a much better look than ramping up rhetoric and perceived might, because your neighbor's interest to attack is seemingly when they are most threatened by show of force.             The United States has long taken advantage of its allies, while using economic bargaining to secure peaceful existence. The European Union is a clear ally in the spread of Democracy and Capitalism, two tenants central to the existence of the United States. It is this point that makes recent events troubling with regards to a peaceful future.             In an effort to bolster nationalism, our country has tur...
Read more

Waltz's Neorealism

The reading by Waltz points out some key points that Neorealists believe in. Neorealists view power as a possibly useful means. Neorealism contends that international politics can be understood only if the effects of structure are added to the unit-level explanations of traditional realism. It rejects the assumption that man’s innate lust for power constitutes a sufficient cause of war in the absence of of any other. Specifically, we need to look at the causal link interacting units and international outcomes. We’ve established before with Hobbes that the system we live in is anarchy. States are rational actors that at their basest level want to survive. Neorealism states that within an anarchy, states need to provide their own security to protect themselves from threats. This security dilemma is a problem, war occurs. This depends on situations and characteristics of states, not because states want to have war. The more important question then becomes what started th...
Read more

Corporations Will Run Amuck

Corporations help create domestic and global economic prosperity. However, when they grow extremely rich they can become powerful which may threaten sovereign actors’ authority, both on a national and international level. Additionally, through hefty donations their lobbying capability allows them to manipulate politicians and the political process undermining democratic processes and devaluing the voice of the people.  In order to prevent corporations from interfering with the democratic processes there needs to be an overarching system that monitors what corporations do and how they do it. To a certain extent room and flexibility may help corporations better compete against one another. Capitalist societies like the United States believe that less regulations on corporations means more incentive to be innovative. And while that may be true to some extent, there are also many abuses these companies commit in order to maximize their profits. Without strict gui...
Read more