Hannah Dawson - How violence became quintessential to the idea of the Modern State

A core idea in political philosophy since at least the 17th century, if not since antiquity, is that violence is quintessential to the definition of politics and to the State.

About Hannah Dawson

"I teach the History of Ideas at King's College London.

I work on early modern philosophy, especially moral and political thought, and also the history of feminism."

Using the threat of force to maintain order

A core idea in political philosophy since at least the 17th century, if not since antiquity, is that violence is quintessential to the definition of politics and to the State. The basic idea is that the State needs the threat of force in order to coerce people into maintaining order. People only behave well, the thought is, if they’re frightened of what will happen if they follow their impulses and, for example, murder someone they don’t like.

A key figure here is the English 17th century philosopher Thomas Hobbes. He made a statement that remains very powerful to this day. Hobbes was writing in the middle of the 17th century in response to the English Civil War, and against this backdrop of revolution and war, he wrote his classic masterpiece Leviathan in order to show just how awful it was when you didn’t have the violent apparatus of the State to keep you safe. He thought that without the violent apparatus of the modern State, human beings would be in a condition of war. That’s his famous thought: the condition of nature is a condition of war.

Key Points

• In the 17th century, Thomas Hobbes argued that the natural condition of people is war, which is why an all-powerful State with the threat of force was needed to maintain order.
• In the 20th century, Hannah Arendt argued that violence only leads to more violence and doesn’t allow for political dissent.
• Abolition theorists argue that the criminal justice system not only fails to keep us safe but also harms the citizens it should protect.