Emma Morales
Philos 333
Option #1 Term Paper
Hobbes, Rousseau, and The Walking Dead
Introduction (Word Count, 75)
The state of nature is a hypothetical approach when discerning the limits of government.1
For this paper I will employ a hypothetical thought experiment by using the zombie apocalypse
in the show The Walking Dead, in order to situate modern man in the state of nature. I will then
compare both Thomas Hobbes’ and Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s competing theories on the source
of political authority.
Part I (Word Count, 480)
Hobbes and Rousseau both start by comparing man’s physical and mental equalities and
inequalities. Hobbes, on the one hand, concludes rather quickly that all men are more equal than
not but “without a common power to keep them all in awe,” he concludes that man would be in a
continual state of war.2 He claims that primitive man, without a governing power to moderate the
passions, was in a continual state of war and this was what brought about the need for a
governing authority. Furthermore, human behavior, Hobbes claims, is driven by the desire for
self-preservation and happiness and in order to preserve oneself and locate and obtain happiness,
man must employ a source of governing power. However, it is explicitly obvious that Hobbes
also employs fear as a manipulative tool to convince the reader that some form of governing
authority is necessary.3 Hobbes uses the scarcity of goods as the reasoning behind the fear that
drives man into conflict with all other men.4 A governing authority, in Hobbes’ view, was then
necessary in order to keep others from harming or stealing one’s goods. In this hypothetical
1
Garrett, Jeremy, Social and Political Philosophy, Week 1 Handout, pp. 2.
Hobbes, Thomas, Leviathan, pp. 2.
3
Ibid, pp. 1.
4
Ibid, pp. 1.
2
Emma Morales
Philos 333
Option #1 Term Paper
thought experiment, Hobbes’ theory is best represented by “the Governor” in The Walking Dead,
whose ethic is “you kill or you die.” The Governor’s totalitarian approach employs fear as
justification for, and to maintain power, and throughout the show, the scarcity of goods is a
prevalent problem. However, it is fear that drives the Governor’s behavior, not the search for and
protection of goods.
Rousseau, on the other hand, finds that man’s inequalities are both physical and political
and that the political differences are what make men unfairly unequal.5 He disagrees with the
Hobbesian view of the state of nature because he sees too many qualities in Hobbes’ primitive
man that resulted from civilization and socialization, although he agrees with Hobbes that selfpreservation is at the root of human nature. However, what sets Rousseau even further apart from
Hobbes is his theory of human compassion which moderates the drive for self-preservation.
Rousseau claims that human compassion determines one’s actions and not the obligation to
follow a moral law, like Hobbes asserts. Furthermore, Rousseau suggests that it was man’s desire
for private property that caused a breakdown in human compassion and first sparked the need for
a governing authority.6 In The Walking Dead, Rousseau’s view is best represented by “Rick” and
the paternalistic governing authority that emerged among the men in the group. Rousseau’s
theory about property is also quite evident as securing a safe haven becomes extremely
important, and protecting it from outside invaders, whether human or zombie, requires a sort
logic and justification that goes against the capacity for human compassion.
Part II (Word Count, 914)
5
Rousseau, Jean-Jacques, A Discourse upon the Origin and the Foundation of Inequality among
Mankind, pp. 1.
6
Ibid, pp. 11.
Emma Morales
Philos 333
Option #1 Term Paper
Season three in The Walking Dead sets up the state of nature quite nicely in episode one
when Rick and his group stumble upon a prison and encounter prisoners that had been trapped
there for ten months with no idea what had happened to the outside world. Rick informs them
that the country’s infrastructure had completely fallen and man is left to his own machinations
for survival. For Hobbes, this is the worst possible scenario and demands the consent of people
to be governed by a common power in order to avoid complete chaos.7 Ideally, in Hobbes’ view,
people would want to band together under a common governing authority purely out of fear of
the unknowable results ground in mans’ predisposition for “…envy, and hatred, and finally
war.”8 What Hobbes forgets is that those are also reasons for man to avoid banding together
under a common power if, as he suggests, envy, hatred, and war are innate in humans.
The tension between self-preservation and compassion that Rousseau described becomes
very real in the first few episodes of Walking Dead as a battle over property ends in injuries or
casualties on both sides. It is interesting to note, however, that both sides had already chosen a
source of authority represented by Rick on one side and “Tomas” on the other. This fact might
support Rousseau’s claim that political authority results as “a response to the breakdown of
natural compassion and equality that occurs when humans become socialized and civilized.”9
Although the world in The Walking Dead is quite post-apocalyptic, humans are still essentially
social and civilized so it seems almost natural for one in a group to assume the responsibilities of
leader. The clash over the prison also supports Rousseau’s theory that private property is the
7
Hobbes, Thomas, Leviathan, pp. 1, 3, and 6.
Ibid, pp. 6.
9
Garrett, Jeremy, Social and Political Philosophy, Week Three Handout, pp. 5.
8
Emma Morales
Philos 333
Option #1 Term Paper
source of “a thousand quarrels and conflicts.”10 Private property, in Rousseau’s view, was an
invention of modern man, not primitive man, so he disagrees with Hobbes’ claim that primitive
man was in continual war since it was more likely that fighting over property was also a modern
invention.
The difference between Hobbes’ and Rousseau’s views on the source of political
authority consists then of different views on human nature—in short, human morals and ethics.
While Hobbes insists that humans with no governing authority are susceptible to the whims and
drives of passion, Rousseau asserts that compassion is humans’ most telling quality and a
breakdown in the capacity for compassion is the actual source of the need for a governing
authority. Rick assumed his role of authority because of a breakdown in human compassion—
namely, the zombie apocalypse that thrust humanity into chaos. Additionally, and perhaps
because of his background, the people in Rick’s group looked to him as an authority figure. It
can even be said that the Governor assumed his role of authority because of a breakdown in
human compassion as the deaths of his wife and daughter (whom he now keeps in a closet as a
zombie) have all but eliminated his capacity for compassion. However, the Governor displays a
more Hobbesian reasoning for assuming power—fear.
The “continual fear, and danger of violent death,” is what Hobbes claims cause men to be
in continual war with one another.11 This is evident in the Governor. While Rick also
demonstrates fear at times, his capacity for compassion, although stifled after the death of his
wife, remains intact. Rick’s compassion moderates his actions, like Rousseau suggests and it is
10
Rousseau, Jean-Jacques, A Discourse upon the Origin and the Foundation of Inequality among
Mankind, pp. 13.
11
Hobbes, Thomas, Leviathan, pp. 2.
Emma Morales
Philos 333
Option #1 Term Paper
only when his self-preservation is in danger that he reacts with fear. This example creates some
problems for Hobbes’ theory which relies heavily on fear as the catalyst for a governing power
and seems to ignore the human capacity for compassion. In Walking Dead we can see these two
competing ethics play out in the actions of Rick and the Governor. We can see that, because of
Rick’s compassion, sounder and morally superior decisions are made as opposed to the
Governor’s actions which all stem from fear and which in turn can be correlated to immoral and
unethical decisions. For the Governor, because of fear, everyone is an enemy, even if no
imminent threat is posed. If the reasoning behind having a governing authority is to prevent war
and chaos, as Hobbes claims, then one would assume the governing authority to be devoid of the
things that in effect cause war and chaos. This is why Rousseau makes a much sounder argument
for the reasoning behind a governing authority.
While Rousseau acknowledges human’s inclination to fall prey to fear at times, his
assertion that compassion will generally, and at times, involuntarily, override actions triggered
by fear gives the reasoning for a governing authority a more moral backing. In Rousseau’s view,
a breakdown in compassion resulting from man’s desire for private property, and not simply fear,
drives the need for a governing authority. But here is where man’s political inequalities are most
visible as those with property will be more likely to be protected under the governing authority
than those without. This point is even visible in The Walking Dead, as loners like “Michonne”
with no property or group to claim her become instant outsiders that are held with suspicion and
contempt no matter where they go.
Conclusion (Word Count, 100)
What does this suggest for these two competing theories? For Hobbes who suggests
humans need a common power to avoid war, The Walking Dead shows that if that common
Emma Morales
Philos 333
Option #1 Term Paper
power relies on fear as a motivator, war becomes unavoidable. This contradicts Hobbes’ theory
as, in his search for peace man only finds war because of fear. Rousseau offers hope for
humanity as actions moderated by compassion lead to wiser decisions that in turn, avoid war. At
the end of season three, rather than eliminate the survivors of “Woodbury” out of fear, Rick
allows them into his tight-knit group, avoiding war.