After Hobbes concluded that it is natural and rational for people to give up a little freedom to ensure the security of self-preservation, Hobbes develops an idea of the forms of social organization and political system compatible with these goals. The state in which people renounce individual freedom in exchange for some common security is the social contract. Hobbes defines the contract as a „transfer of mutual law.“ In the state of nature, everyone has the right to everything – the right to natural freedom is not limited. The social contract is the agreement by which individuals transfer each other`s natural right. In other words, I am renouncing my natural right to steal your food because you are giving up your natural right to steal mine. Instead of natural law, we have created a limited right; in this case, the right of ownership. Hobbes notes that we do not explicitly conclude these agreements because we were born into a civil society with laws and conventions already in place (i.e. treaties). By carrying out the thought experiment on the state of nature and continuing the reasoning that Hobbes presented to us, we can discern the foundations of our civil commitment.

32. animals that are unable to enter into binding agreements between themselves to avoid causing or suffering harm have no right to justice; Similarly, for peoples who either could not or did not want to enter into binding agreements, so as not to do harm or suffer damage. Given the long-standing and widespread influence of the theory of the social contract, it is not surprising that it is also the subject of much criticism in many philosophical points of view. In particular, feminists and racial philosophers have made important arguments about the substance and viability of social contract theory. Mills` central argument is that there is an even more fundamental „race treaty“ for Western society than the social contract. This racist treaty first determines who is considered a political and moral being, and thus defines the parameters that can be linked to the freedom and equality promised by the social contract. Some people, especially white men, are full-fledged persons under the treaty of race. As such, they have the right to enter into the social contract and to enter into certain legal contracts. They are considered to be entirely human and therefore egalitarian and liberticidal.

Their status as full-fledged persons gives them greater social power. In particular, it gives them the power to enter into contracts that are the subject of the treaty, while others are denied such a right and are placed in the status of contractual objects. Everywhere, we have distinguished the problem from the righteous of the deliberator model.

Categories: Allgemein