No sillies, not that hobbes!!!!
Hobbes is well known for thinking that people are ruthless and need to be governed. I agree with him and think he is right; people as a GROUP need to be governed. I don't think he gives individuals a fair shot; individuals are relatively harmless and quiescent, but when there is a group, I feel that groups do need to be governed (civil laws), or they could potentially be dangerous.
Hobbes says, as my friend Robert mentioned in class, (this is a quote from Robert's reaction)....”we, by nature, continually strive to fulfill our pleasures with disregard for others is just the way we are”. This is why Hobbes thinks we need to be governed and we are ruthless. Scientifically, this is true. Humans will fight and die for the basic necessities of life (food, water, shelter, etc.). It is true that if we are starving and thirsty, we will fight to the death for our needs. However, fulfilling pleasure is different from fulfilling need, and that's where greed comes into play. Hobbes warns that humans are ruthless and greedy. After basic needs are fulfilled, people don't have anything to fight after (at least in New Paltz, people aren't fighting for a clean water supply, so they fight over “stupid” things that are unnecessary to sustaining life, like being disrespectful to firefighters, or village board seats, or whether or not Main Street should be a one way. Those things are important but not essential to human survival). People need to be governed to keep them in check over the stupid stuff.
Hobbes states that (another Robert quote) “even though we may satisfy our wants for the time being, we are never satisfied and are always thinking of the next way to build on our satisfaction”. This is obvious. People are never happy, and always want more, more, more! I'm applying this, in my mind at least, to the recent switch Monserrate made from Democrat to Republican. Monserrate had a high position in office, was getting things done, and had a ton of money and power. But this wasn't enough for him. After being offered lots of money, he switched to the R side, and thought he would gain power (I actually met with him yesterday afternoon....well, forced him to meet with me and 100 of my friends. Occupied his office in Albany. Boy was that nuts!!!!). So anyway, his wants were satisfied when he was elected in November, and 8 months later, he wanted more, was unsatisfied, and thought of a way to build on his selfish satisfaction. I would think that Hobbes, who suggests that we need government over people because they are bad (and the Monserrate situation is a great example) would suggest that we need laws to keep people from being bad (like a law to disallow switching of parties, since switching parties is like disregarding votes). That could be my biased opinion though; what do you guys think?
I do not think that people are bad and need to be regulated, but I do think that when it's a GROUP and it's an issue of power over that group or being selfish and wanting more than everyone else (from a Hobsian stand point, that's why socialism doesn't work), regulation is necessary.
My favorite philosophical tidbit of Hobbes is his “nasty, brutish, and short”. Nasty brutish and short is basically the life of a man when in his natural state. I used to disagree with Hobbes (I learned about this quote in high school, and here I am a college senior and still writing about it!), but now that I know how big government works, I realize that he is right. New York's government is not strong enough, and Montserrat and the other switchers have waged a war against the Democrats and voters of New York State, for their own personal gains (campaign contributions). Montserrat has created nasty, brutish, and short. He showed us that he was nasty and brutish by ignoring the wishes of his constituency (obviously they elected a D, not an R), and by refusing to meet with us. Then, we, who started out polite, became nasty and brutish by refusing to leave his office and chanting in the building (Sen Montserrat, we want answers!!!!).
I think that people, on their own, are good. It's government that is short, nasty,and brutish. And if people weren't so greedy once in groups, because they want to be the head of the group, most powerful, most rich...that's when it becomes brutish.
