Thomas Hobbes and Battle of Algiers - Thesis Example

Thomas Hobbes – Battle of Algiers Introduction The Hobbesian view labels the members of the Algerian National Liberation Front (FNL) as fighting for something they already possess. This is not true because the French had ruled Algeria since the 1830s. They were under French government that was not very concerned about their welfare. For a country to be freed, it should independently determine its own policies and leadership. To be self-determining, it has to exist as an independent country, under no external rulers.

The Algiers got tired of the French rule and did not want to be ruled by them anymore. They formed, the members of the FNL that was aimed at fighting for Algiers freedom and self-determination. The members of the FNL are believed, from a Hobbesian view to be fighting for what they already own. The Battle of Algiers simply expresses the feelings, reactions and resolves of the Algiers to disallow the French rule in Algiers. It is out rightly indisputable that Hobbes is mistaken about what freedom and self-determination are.

A country cannot be self-determining and freed if it is under an external rule. This paper will maintain that Hobbes view of the FLN is out rightly mistaken about what constitutes true freedom and self-determination.Thomas Hobbes’ Laws of Nature Hobbes makes the claim that the state of nature is a despondent state of war in which significant human ends are dependably achievable. He maintains that everyone being sensible can understand that a war involving all against all is hostile to the fulfillment of her/his concern.

For the Algiers to obtain their self-determination and freedom, they had to fight the French rulers. Having been ruled by the French since 1830s, Algeria could not accept to keep being ruled by them. Hence, they used all means possible to attain their independence, including using children and women to actualize their strategies (Pontecorvo 1967-Movie). Hobbes is mistaken, for without a violent engagement with an invader, power cannot be obtained. All nations in history had to fight for their independence, as opposed to what Hobbes suggests.

Hobbes meaning of freedom Hobbes considers freedom to be the situation where people mutually pledge to each other to conform to a common authority (Hobbes Pt. 1). By the French and Algiers conforming to a common power, it would mean the French rule and Algiers rule approving the group to rule Algeria. It would be unacceptable for a French rule taking charge of Algeria. As well it would not be acceptable to the French to hand over its long rule to the Algiers. Hence, Hobbes beliefs could not be applicable and cannot be applied to Algiers situation.

That would mean Algeria consenting to the French to colonize its people, which would not bring them freedom and independence (Pontecorvo 1967-Movie).ConclusionHobbes was very mistaken in his opinion of the FLN on what true freedom and independence quantify. The FLN was able to redeem Algeria from French rule violently, which brought them lasting independence and freedom. If they had conformed to a common authority, there would have been conflicts. For the attainment of peaceful self-rule and independence, a colony must take over the governance of its nation.

Mutual pledge would further cause conflicts in the end.Works CitedPontecorvo, Gillo. Battle of Algiers. 1967. Movie. Online Hobbes, Thomas. The Leviathan. 2014. Online