Political Philosophers

1
Political Philosophers
2
Philosophical base

• Jean-Jacques Rousseau is one of the most
  important political philosophers. He argued that
  life without government would be terrible because
  people compete with each other for resources,
  threatening freedom and safety. He said that
  people agree to exchange some freedom for
  security in a social contract with government.
  As long as the government serves and protects the
  people, the people should agree to obey.

3

• Taking the view that all people are nasty and
  self-interested, what would the perfect type of
  government be?

4
Thomas Hobbes

• Hobbes believed some people were much stronger
  and smarter than others, but almost everyone was
  motivated by basic self-interest. He said that
  people enter into the social contract with a
  governmental authority to protect themselves and
  their interests.

5

• Are people basically good or evil?

6
John LOCKE

• Locke believed people were basically reasonable
  and equal. He said that liberty is the most
  important political value, and a good government
  would be protective of individual rights. He
  said that people should be willing to obey a
  government that protects their basic rights
  life, liberty, and property.

7
Karl Marx

• Marx thought that all societies were defined by
  class struggles. He believed that workers were
  exploited by the rich with the help of
  governments and religion. Marx believed the
  workers should take over the means of production
  such as corporations or businesses and then use
  that wealth and power to help everybody.

8

• What causes government corruption and social
  injustice?
• Why do rich people always have more power than
  poor people?
• How do rich people get rich and poor people get
  poor?

9
Montesquieu

• Montesquieu believed in monarchy, but set
  government up in a way that no part of it could
  become completely dominant. His ideas are called
  separation of powers or checks and balances.
  He wanted to separating government into different
  parts, and give each part a different power. One
  part would be law making, one part law enforcing,
  and another part law interpreting. Each part
  would have the power to stop the other parts and
  no part would have all the power.