The Thucydidic Perception Of Politics & The State
Thucydides is right when he says that politics is entirely governed by fear, interest and honor, and elegant talk of justice is just talk. This is true not only of Greek society, but the political machinery of many another nations as defined by many of the world’s greatest political and sociology philosophers. Politics might best be defined by the functions it serves. Politics is the dominant ideology and methodology used by the state to preserve and maintain its social order as a whole. Political ideology enables the state to manage conflict as much as it allows the state to strive toward all that is possible in light of its resources and potential. The modern state is designed to enforce norms, arbitrate conflict, plan and protect, and regulate relations with other societies. Central to these functions being successful is some kind of political ideology and authority that is chosen as the best by state leaders to preserve the social order. We will look at different views of politics (i.e., the state ideology) as viewed or promoted by men such as Karl Marx, Thomas Hobbes, Jean Jacques Rousseau, Niccolo Machiavelli, Plato, John Locke and Noam Chomsky in order to attempt an answer to the question of whether or not Thucydides is correct in his political theory.
Thomas Hobbes felt government and politics were imposed on society through a mutual social contract with those governed, those who by entering such a contract surrender much of their natural freedom and liberty in order for some authority to prevent chaos and maintain law and order. Karl Marx and Jean Jaques Rousseau argued that the state and politics were in business to manage conflict. Rousseau’s arguments proposed the theory that mankind is born free but he is a captive of the state and politics because they do not guarantee nor administer impartial justice. Instead, they are put into power by the wealthy and...