Sovereignty and Security; leviathan: Objections and Reactions about the article

Sovereignty and Security: leviathan, Thomas Hobbes

In his article, Sovereignty and Security, Thomas Hobbes explores, in general, the approach of the significance of the social order and contract. First, he portrays the society where there are any rules neither law in which everyone can do whatever he wants according to his reasons, passions, of which he calls the “state of nature”. Therefore, this will lead to a tremendous disorder, war, conflicts against people each other in the way that one will seek to annihilate others and interfere on his liberty in the purpose of competition, distrust, and the seeking of his own value of glory. However, in order to prevent all those problems; there is really a need of a sort of as the central and common power authority that shall be sovereign regard to which everyone will transfer some his rights, liberty, and trust for the fear of violence and the need of peace and safety; the prospect he calls as the “social contract”.
In his approach, he makes some points regarding the difference between rights and law in term of nature by which; he states the right relying on liberty of actions and the law from the rules and reasons that may limits that liberty. He suggests that any sort of ways used by human to protect their own rights and liberty should also based in considering and respecting also those of others as well in some way reciprocal; that is why he mentions the law of Gospel.
It is interesting that the disposition of the world and society today shapes its origins from this philosophy of the “social contract” stated by Thomas Hobbes. It is obvious that such an organization, society, nations, community where there are multitude of people but living without any leading power or system; the expectations is to see what I can signify as anarchy, disorder, and lack of coherency neither a stable integration between people. Because, the rules of law regulated by the authority or the leaders defines how people should behave each other, undertake their activities with any interference to those of others; it is like to create harmony so that everyone could understand how the society is organizing and functioning itself. But, in fact, to think carefully on those perceptions as described by the author, it is to mention that, although the presence of an authority power to promote rights and laws that all the people will be required to follow for the social order, there is no such a full guarantee that this power will protect the law and right at all and provide a full safety of people; because imperfections, carelessness, or mismanagement will always take place; even if the authority cannot really abuse to the power but there will still be some people in some places claiming and raising voices for their security, justice, and liberty which they feel are threatened in some cases. To illustrate some, there are issues in Africa where some authorities are unable to make available the security of people; others are cannot even promote rules of law and sometimes encourage the injustice and impartiality between. Moreover, others are not in the way to prevent impunity from the laws.
In overall, the existence of laws, rights, and the leadership is for the great stature and necessity for humans in the society. At least, On the other hand, the question and the concern is to know whether this might perfectly safe guard the society in every circumstances and situations so that the security, liberty, and safety could not be as factors of some preocupations by some people.

What is blocking the development and the democracy of africa?

It has always bee a stuggle for african to reach the ideal of democracy; in everytime, poticlas leaders, religious leaders, and others organisations talk about democracy and developement in differents perspective, visions, conceptions and beliefs. but what to ask is why the those ultime ideals have problem to be fulfilled?