In this essay I will investigate the concept of freedom by offering an analysis of Hobbes’ Leviathan and Machiavelli’s The Discourses, because I want to show what reaction Machiavelli would have had to Hobbes’ proto-liberal definition of liberty as “the absence of external impediments” in order to help the readers understand how Machiavelli would criticize the concept while offering a deeper analysis of it.
Thomas Hobbes is one of the biggest supporter of Absolutism and the total supremacy of the State on the individuals. He has lived his life in a climate of absolute insecurity and lack of certainty. That is why he wanted to completely reform the human way of thinking. His main goal was that of giving the geometrical strictness to politics
…show more content…
He thinks that the concept of liberty is, in fact, not compatible with that of peace: peace corresponds to a perpetual research of predominance and so it has to be taken away.
In conclusion, having considered both Machiavelli and Hobbes’ analysis and thoughts about the concept of liberty, they can be said to be one the opposite of the other. However, it would be interesting to see what both Machiavelli and Hobbes would argue about the limits that this individual liberty has. As John Stuart Mill states,
“The liberty of the individual must be thus far limited; he must not make himself a nuisance to other people. But if he refrains from molesting others in what concerns them, and merely acts according to his own inclination and judgment in things which concern himself, the same reasons which show that opinion should be free, prove also that he should be allowed, without molestation, to carry his opinions into practice at his own cost.”
A man could enjoy his liberty of action and expression following his own instincts and appetites as long as it does not affect negatively the liberty of others. He can put into action his own thoughts and beliefs, taking as a personal responsability the consequences that this action could