Hobbes, Locke, and Hurricane Katrina

So I know it’s been a long time since we’ve talked about Hobbes, but this post has been in the making for a while, so I hope you guys are willing to do some review. In studying Hobbes, I’ve been reminded of an article I read in my AP Gov class in high school about the widespread looting and violence that occurred in the immediate aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Published in a November 2005 issue of the Times-Picayune and entitled “If only the looters had read Hobbes,” the article claims that these events provide a modern day example of why Hobbes wrote that, when left to their own devices, humans fall into a state of war and “use violence to make themselves masters of other men’s persons, wives, children, and cattle.” I would add two additional main points that Hobbes might make. First, because humans will always have needs that are outside of themselves, the state of nature will also be one of constant competition. In addition, he would also be likely to label this instance as further proof of the need for the Leviathan.

Since many of our readings this semester have had common themes and sought to answer some of the same questions, I thought I’d use the circumstances of this article as an opportunity to do some hypothesizing about how some of our other authors would have reacted to these events. In other words, what would Locke have said about this looting and violence? Property would certainly be at the heart of his response. Locke argued that it is the duty of the sovereign to protect the property of its people. It is thus my opinion that in this case, Locke would insist that the citizens of New Orleans overthrow their sovereign due to its inability to carry out this duty. (Hobbes, on the other hand, would merely claim that this failure means that the sovereign was never sovereign to begin with.) As Locke stated that the taking of someone else’s property is an action that should very rarely go unpunished, I wonder what punishment he would advocate in this situation. Perhaps this case is yet another example of why Locke’s philosophy doesn’t really hold up in modern times.

Agree? Disagree? What would Rousseau have said about these post- Katrina events?

Here is the text of the article: (I can’t simply post it as a link because you have to be registered with the website in order to read it online)

If only the looters had read Hobbes

Howard Hunter

Published: November 6, 2005

In mid-September, I'd expected to be back in my routine, teaching history and civics to high-school juniors and seniors. Instead, like many other teachers in our area, I found myself mopping up classrooms in my flooded school and throwing out moldy, ruined books in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. It gave me time to think. And one evening, in an effort to make sense of Katrina's fury and the ugly aftermath of lawlessness, I turned to the only option of the middle-aged history teacher: I picked up "Leviathan" by the English political philosopher, Thomas Hobbes.

Hobbes lived in the 17th century, when Europe imploded with religious wars and political turmoil. Marauding private armies roamed the countryside. Universities shut down and cities closed their gates, imposing curfews to protect against brigands and wolves. In the Thirty Years' War (1618-48) up to a third of the population of the German states died from violence, pestilence and famine.

Small wonder that Hobbes famously described the natural state of man as "nasty, brutish and short." Left to their own devices, Hobbes wrote, human beings sink into a state of war and "use violence to make themselves masters of other men's persons, wives, children and cattle."

The only cure is a strong government, a "Leviathan," he said, with a coercive power to save men from themselves. Otherwise chaos reigns.

New Orleans suffered a Hobbesian nightmare after the storm with widespread looting and violence, the civil authorities initially unable to curb the unrest. A Leviathan was needed, and those of us who could return to our homes lived with a 6 p.m. curfew and troops patrolling our neighborhoods. The antidote for the Hobbesian nightmare was a Hobbesian solution.

Reading Hobbes is hardly comfort food, but his relevance goes beyond his grim view of human nature. Hobbes saw government as a social contract, a covenant between the polity and the governed, who give up some liberty and obey the laws in return for protection. The first function of government is to protect, and although our ideas of sovereignty and human rights are vastly different from Hobbes', the social contract between law-abiding citizens and government is still paramount.

Yet what we all witnessed in New Orleans was a breakdown of the social contract from both sides of the equation, whether it was a failure of government to maintain the levees or residents looting Wal-Mart.

The question is how to restore the social contract. Political institutions tend to be self-correcting, since their existence depends on the consent of the voters. The restoration of the social contract from the top down is fairly evident -- levees must be shored up and the logistical bungling of federal, state and local governments must be addressed to avoid a repeat performance in the next disaster.

But repairing the social contract from the bottom up -- creating a responsible citizenry -- is far more difficult because it calls for long-term solutions.

While having troops cruising our avenues might have its attractions these days, in the long run it's un-American -- that's what our forebears fought against at Lexington and Concord 230 years ago.

As an educator, I believe that the only way to restore the social contract is for the public to demand a quality educational system for all our children. Enlightened self-interest and human dignity should be reasons enough for those of us who support parochial and private schools to make public education our first priority.

Education is not a panacea for all social and economic ills, but it's the best solution we have for teaching the importance of the rule of law and the responsibilities of a citizen.

Every child has the right to an education in a clean, safe place with qualified teachers. If we don't ensure this, we violate the social contract, as did the federal government in their folly, or even worse, the looters in their nihilism.