San Carlos Seminary

The anti-political philosophers: Rene Descartes, Jean-Jacques

Rousseau and Thomas Hobbes

A term paper in Renaissance and Modern Philosophy

Submitted by:

Jeronimo H. Papa

College 3, Group 4, San Carlos Seminary

Submitted to:

Rev. Fr. Luis David SJ

 I. Introduction

In contrast to the political, this is the anti-political.

Our class in Modern and Renaissance Philosophy presented two
opposing principles, the Political and the Anti-political.
Political philosophers include Plato, Aristotle and Machiavelli.
On the other hand, the Anti-Political thinkers are Rene
Descartes, John Jacques Rousseau and Thomas Hobbes. This paper
will focus with the anti-political thinkers who contradicts what
the political philosopher are trying to push: seeking for what
is the truth and staying with what is the truth which can be
found in this world. This world which is worth-saving.

Modern Philosophy is anti-political because it faces issue

from top-down instead of down-up. Anti-political is
characterized by looking at issues from ideas then bringing it
down to the public. It is like operating on “dead butterflies.”
What the society really needs is more of getting the consensus
of the people then bringing it into a solution which will be
beneficial for all. The process of the anti-political is a
product of fear from challenges which may arise from getting the
opinions from the mass. If only they know that good things may
result from challenging forces. In other sense, a state becomes
anti-political when the minority has no more say.

II. Rene Descartes

One of the anti-political philosophers is Rene Descartes.

He is popular with his formulation “Cogito ergo sum.” He is
considered one of the anti-political because he would go out the
world of the senses since it is the realm of the evil
genius/devil. He, therefore, coined this term “cogito” as not
the realm of the evil genius. It is where the evil genius cannot

2
penetrate. This is contrary to what Machiavelli is trying to say
that we must stay with the facts even if it is fragmentary.
This anti-political thought rest with the idea that everything
we see in this world is just a product of our illusion and the
things we could only trust are those of the cogito. The way I
view this philosophy, Descartes would like to leave this world
since this is not a reliable one and focus on the world where it
is clear and distinct. This is a way to escape this world and to
become a ruler is to leave the facts behind and focusing on what
is the ideal. This kind of leadership will definitely not be a
productive leadership since it is not focused on the grassroots
level but only to those of the ideal things which are hardly to
happen in this realm or world. This is leading a community with
fiction and with this you destroy the community. The political
will definitely embrace this present situation of the world and
do something about this because it is worth-saving. This world
is not something we have to escape to but something we need to
reconstruct and build for the preservation of mankind.

Descartes creating a realm which is above the realm of the

senses implies that this world is illusory and therefore we must
not believe this. Leading us to the notion that we have to obey
those superiors who claim to have the knowledge far more
reliable than what we experience in our daily lives. In contrast
with the political, especially Plato, they are after not on
obedience with superiors but rulership as servant-
leadership/stewardship. This is a rulership clearly stated with
Plato’s The Republic and The Laws. This is also a kind of
leadership which does not seek its own interest but the interest
of the common good. Descartes’s formulation is very much
contradictory to this because he emphasized the sovereignty of
the cogito as the only reliable source of what is the truth. It

3
is focused not on the problems that the world or the society is
facing but on mathematical ideas, unchanging truths which
somehow will not help the society grow. It is clearly an anti-
political idea since it does not focus on consensus building but
rather on the notion of what is truth based on the cogito which
is being meditated upon by only a selected few magistrates. If
this will be the case of leadership, then many will be
manipulated and many will be living in illusion.

One of the main principles behind the cogito of Rene

Descartes is abstraction. Abstraction is the process of the mind
to universalize particular ideas. This universality is a product
of illusion wherein the consensus made from this process does
not fully cover the entirety of the picture being presented in a
society. It is also noteworthy to take that the cogito is the
realm of physics, mathematics, thermodynamics and alike. With
this idea, there came upon developments in the history of
weaponry which does not build society and state but destroys it.
Guns, machine guns, atomic bombs, grenades, etc. are products of
this abstraction of mathematical truths. These are inventions of
man which they believe will be of use for the common good. In
reality, these weapons became man’s greatest nightmare for it
kills thousands and thousands of civilians. The question
remains, how can such idea be political? How can you consider
weapons of man’s destruction be political if its aim is to
annihilate the people which we must preserve and serve? It is
necessary to tackle the idea that destruction can never be
political. The Political is about the building up of polis or
state and not to destroying it. Let me take as an example former
United States President Harry S. Truman. The said president
ordered his army to use its new atomic bomb to Hiroshima and
Nagasaki. In his pronouncement, he said that the atomic bomb is

4
and addition to USA’s arsenal of righteousness. How can a thing
be justice or righteousness if it targets the obliteration of
the human race? To contrast this idea let me go back to Plato’s
The Republic. In the said book, Plato/Socrates criticizes the
idea of justice as giving what is owed and to give what is
fitting for others. To understand this reformulation he gave
examples like for a doctor, it befits to bodies and medicine and
as craftsman to arts. This reformulation of the meaning of
justice made a significant distinction with to whom one wants to
be partner with. For instance, during war, it is better to have
a skilled soldier as your partner rather than a just man. Same
as true with a skilled banker is a better partner than a just
man during peace time. But this distinction of a just man as
somehow a separate form of art like a soldier, banker, poet,
etc. is quite absurd and needs more probing and proficiency.
With this reformulation we can say that justice is somehow
useless in terms of enterprise and professional use for the
community. Expertise over justice and virtue becomes the name of
the game for the community. This kind of principle of the having
an imbalance of progress and values formation is indeed anti-
political. It is indeed a critique to political. The anti-
political thought of Descartes leads people to focus more on the
cogito rather than on the education through values and skills
formation of the citizenry.

It is now being given to light that the anti-political

thought is only fixated with ideas which appears to be appealing
for the common good. Too much fixation on ideas rather than the
reality of what is happening in the grassroots level leads to
fantasy formation. In Plato’s The Republic, it is notable that
he proposes a lot of things to consider in order to educate both
the leaders and the citizens. Education entails rigorous

5
training and for the leaders it might take them more than twenty
years just to be called an educated man. Education is a crucial
training of citizens. If citizens of the state are not trained
properly, it will lead to the demolition of the city-state.
Though many had misinterpreted Plato’s work and did not flourish
over time but I believe that his works are far better than the
pretentious thought of the anti-political. The basic formation
of the citizens in the grassroots level is a fundamental step to
achieve a good polis or state. Remembering our lesson in Cretan
Colony, Plato emphasizes the education of the citizens in
Musicae and Gymnasticae. Education’s aim is the development of
all virtues, not merely the virtues of the soldier. But can
virtue be taught? Plato’s answer is that virtue can be taught,
but not primarily by admonition, nor by admonition, nor by
explanation and proof of principles, as one would teach a
science. As for Plato, no virtue or technical skill can be
acquired except by long practice and by habituation. The real
problem really lies in how to induce these sentiments to the
youth that will make his acquired virtue a genuine expression of
his inner disposition. Education must be a process of painful
discipline. It is as Plato would sometimes describe a process of
molding the soul into a pattern. A Pattern of manliness in
gymnasticae and musicae.

Why is it important that people belonging in a city-state

must receive a holistic education? Holistic Education is a
methodology which focuses on preparing citizens to meet any
challenges they may face in life and in their chosen career. The
most important theories behind holistic education are learning
about oneself, developing health relationships and positive
social behaviors, social and emotional development, resilience,
and the ability to view beauty, experience transcendence, and

6
truth. This is what Plato envisions, a city where people are not
equipped with knowledge but also with values education. It is
not merely abstraction but also application. In the modern
times, Holistic Education notes that children need not only
develop academically, but develop the ability to survive in the
modern world. They need to be able to rise and meet challenges
presented to them in the future and contribute to the world in
which they live. This type of learning is said to begin during
childhood. Children need to learn to first value themselves,
their worth, and recognize their abilities and how to be able to
do what they want in life. Doing what they want ties into the
relationships that they build and how they treat those
relationships. Holistic education teaches children about their
immediate relationships with their friends and family as well as
social development, health, and intellectual development. The
idea of resilience is a learned quality, not one which is
inherent and thus children must be taught to face difficulties
in life and overcome them. The last concept inspires children to
observe truths, natural beauty, and the meaning of life. Many
schools, nowadays, focus only on the academic side of education.
Schools merely present in classroom ideas which are to be
memorized, analyzed and noted down. After that, what is next?
They are not taught how to face life challenges and
difficulties. Thus, more students are committing suicide because
they are not equipped to address academic pressures well.
Instead of producing graduates which will be beneficial for the
city-state, they ended up being in their graves just before they
contribute something. Statistics shows that there are more
suicide incident coming from first-world countries compared to
those from the third world countries. The idea of statistics
here is also anti-political because it tends to wrap issues of
the public sphere with mathematical formulas. Surveys are only

7
suggestions but people took them literally. They are considered
blind guides for they appear to cover the majority of the
community well in fact they only cover a minimal portion of the
whole. It is a very clear outline of the anti-political
appearing to be political.

In relation to the law, laws are seen in the anti-political

perspective as principles which never changes. It is in total
contrast to the political view that laws are need to be
understood by the people not as subservience with the
metaphysical standard which does not vary over time. Laws are
not written in stones by of fleshly hearts. If we see laws as
“dura lex sed lex,” then we fail to see its value of service for
the people. In the anti-political, the law is not the servant of
the people but its master. Laws should help assist man achieves
its goal and excellence in the society. The foundation of laws
are not mere ideas but the heart.

III. John Jacques Rousseau

Another anti-political philosopher is John Jacques Rousseau

who like Descartes would definitely leave the facts aside. He is
advocate of fantasy formation. Machiavelli taught us that
leaders should be like the fox who always stay with the facts.
For him, he does not believe on the idea of consensus building
but rather on the idea of the self-sufficiency of every human
beings. That is for him what the common good is all about, when
man would leave facts behind and take into consideration his
very self. His philosophy can be characterized as misanthropy as
he say on the Second Discourse that man’s first feeling was that
of his existence, his first care of preserving it. It is a form
of misanthropy because it whatever is held good in the society
is always an action towards self-preservation of the individual

8
members of the community. This attitude also lead for man to be
superior to other animals because of its thirst for development
and for domination. Everyone is aiming for his/her own private
advantage. This is how man would advance himself/herself in the
society. The true nature of man is in isolation and in self-
sufficiency. And, man being in the state of nature will have a
hard time relating to other men that is why language were
invented. For Rousseau, language is just a flippant activity of
man who are in state of boredom. Language are just born out of
the minds of men and with they thought that they can replicate
their minds, well in fact they cannot. Rationality is good news
for Rousseau because it makes people indifferent to other
people.

In addition, Rousseau criticized philosophy. He views

philosophy as a selfish endeavor that enslaves and took
advantage of other people. For him a true philosophy and a true
philosopher is just a fantasy made to take advantage of the weak
and the unlearned. Moreover, philosophy creates distinction
between masters and servant, between lords and slaves. Plato is
opposed to this because philosopher rulers or kings are the most
qualified people to rule a city-state because of the education
they had attained for a significant number of years of training
with the truth and values of the world. A true philosopher for
Plato is not “gawa-gawa lamang” but can be attained through
rigorous training to his so called Musicae and Gymnasticae. True
leadership can be taught and can be learned. Rousseau, on the
other hand, degrades philosophy to a manipulator which the
powerful and the strong can use to over power and dominate the
marginalized and the uneducated. This leads for people to
blindly obey their superiors. It is contradictory to what the
political are pushing forward: a society ruled through servant

9
leadership and community building. Rousseau destroys the idea of
philosophy which is to gather rather than scatter where
gathering is seen as a historical endeavor rather than a museum
of dead butterflies.

Rationality is bad news because it makes people indifferent

of other people. Let me give an example in the academic world.
Students are often misled to create papers which are too
technical that even ordinary people cannot understand. The more
educated you are with the concepts and ideas, the more you
create a gap among societal hierarchies. Such concepts remaining
in the context of ideas are not helpful in the society. They
just create garbage which continually pile up and then nothing
happens. It is a clear definition of the anti-political as
focused on ideas rather than concrete means of building a
society. Thus, Rousseau had taken for granted what the political
had held holy: language, common good and mutual success.

Furthermore, John Jacques Rousseau talks about

passions. For Rousseau, he degenerates passions as mere
inventions bored women. Out of their own sloppiness to work,
they dwell too much on emotions and their feelings toward one
another. On the other hand, Plato and Aristotle give importance
with passions because it is like a force which drive to do their
task in the community. One can have justice if we have thirst
for justice. Same some as true with other virtues like prudence
and temperance. Moreover, Plato would warn his people in the
polis about fathers who teach their sons that justice is to
pretend to be good when necessary. We take for instance the
electoral culture of our modern society. It is fair enough to
say that here in the Philippines, people tend to forget easily
about the crimes and misfortunes that some of the reelected

10
government officials had done. After being pardoned for graft
and corruption cases, some politicians are elected to different
positions. It is indeed an anti-political principle that
Rousseau presents when he said that it is justice to pretend to
be good in order to win the hearts of the people. People are
being led with injustices and disguises of those who are seated
in power. One consolation that we can get from here is that this
kind of society will not prosper in the end.

In terms of the common good, Aristotle and Plato is very

vulgar with their conception of justice as a principle which
binds the people together towards the common good. Justice is
defined by them as doing what is one’s role in the community. It
is fulfilling one’s hat in the society. It is in doing with
excellence the duty tasked to them that one does justice.
Justice can be defined in terms of its relationship to other
men. In doing one’s role, men thought of its value in the bigger
community they belong. Unlike Rousseau, men are thought to be
selfish as they only think of their role in the society in order
to preserve their private needs and wants. Rousseau has his
conviction towards the selfishness of man even after doing
his/her duties in the state where he/she belongs. According to
his work The Social Contract, the aim of the social contract
will be to find the form of human association that will enable
me to lean upon the benefit and affection from the whole
(massive protection). For example, people tend to be good to
those who are working in the government so that they can be
helped to protect themselves whenever they face certain
challenges. Same as true with the Church. The Church has a lot
of properties to protect and in order for them to get rid of the
burden of thinking for such things, they maintain good
relationships with the government in order for the law to be in

11
favor for them as well. In the language of Rousseau, the Ugnayan
ng Barangay at ng Simbahan (UBAS) is simply a social contract
between the two. Where the former benefits from the latter
during campaigns and election and the latter takes advantage of
the former for protection, security and sponsorship. Thus, all
of us are in need of association to help us protect our private
reputation and identity.

Additionally, Rousseau advocates that people will only be

good if they are forced to be good. People will only react or
response in the agenda of the government or the oppressor if
they are forced. Force is used in order to make people fear for
them. If a society is run out of fear and not out of goodness
and justice, can we call that political? A sure idea is that
this kind of society will not last.

Going further in Rousseau’s Social Contract, we can find in

Book II that he divinizes “General Will.” The General Will has
the power which is indivisible and inalienable. The power of
General Will is absolute that it never gets mistake. This will
can be likened to leaders, politicians, prime ministers and
church leaders. We thought that leaders and politicians never
get mistake. This is anti-political and teach that there can
only be one super general will which can encompass everyone. The
Catholic Church now experiences purification when the issue
regarding the sex abuse of some priests from the States were
publicized after the Grand Jury of Pennsylvania released its
official statement. Many were shocked and many would want to get
themselves out from the Catholic Church. It is hypocritical to
believe that our Church leaders do not sin as if after they get
ordained but it is a scandal indeed to see Church leaders who
after long years of training will still err on the battlefield.

12
There are two anti-political idea being presented here. First
the idea that “Fathers do not sin” is wrong. Second, education
of leaders is an ongoing formation that never stops when they
graduate from academic requirement. Plato would talk about the
long years of Education that Philosopher Rulers must undergo
before reaching such state. There are no shortcuts when it comes
to education of the rulers. Moreover, we cannot think of only
one leader who is so ideal and will never err.

Moreover, the General Will is distinguishable from the sum

of all the wills. The sum of all wills is an exercise of
democracy which is in great contrast with the anti-political.
Getting all the wills is consensus building but the General Will
is like an exercise of the right of the Representative which for
them is the True democracy. The General Will is like the crystal
ball or even the panopticon who sees everything and creates a
dominating effect over his subjects. On the bottom of the
domination lies the acolytes of the General Will. They are the
only people reliable of contemplation with this principle. And,
people are made to obey these acolytes. Like aforementioned, the
acolytes force the people to be good and follow their
interpretations from the message of the General Will.

The implication of the General Will is the presence of

self-righteous leaders. It is also the perfect recipe for world
wars. Let us take for example the colonization of the Nazi in
Europe. The self-righteous leader, Adolf Hitler, believed that
he was the herald to preserve the whole human race. He was the
acolyte of the General Will who told him to restore the strong
Arian race who are supposed to dwell in this world. It is also
the interpretation of the General Will that leads to the
slaughter of millions of Jewish people detained first in

13
concentration camps. The presence of the acolytes is a sign of
corruption and is something anti-political.

Rousseau talks about the Letter to Geneva as white

sepulchers, beautiful from the outside and rotten in the inside.
It contains the preaching of Calvinism who believed in the
predestination that only few will be selected. It is also
addressed in the letter women as flowers of morality but
reality, he hate women. He is a human being hater. His
suspicious of gifts. For this reason he does not know how to
trust with others.

According to Rousseau, superior people has the answers. I

can do without my neighbor becomes the motto of everyone. Thus,
it produced anything with himself not with others. People should
just give everything to the leaders and to the geniuses which is
very anti-political. People are wanted to run to law givers.
Polity depends not to the people to the selected few who call
themselves geniuses. This leads to tyranny, where the superior
being is the one governing and manipulating the whole society.
To contradict tyranny, we must create groups and systems.

Moreover, the superior people left the people on their own

and are not being encouraged to bring into reflection what they
think. They are against agora or public discourse of debate.
Rousseau wants everything be mystery in order to give space for
the law givers and authorities. Therefore, he is authoritarian.
He leaves people totally dumb in order to worship belief.

IV. Thomas Hobbes

Like the first two anti-political thinkers, Thomas Hobbes

believes in the idea that this world is not trustworthy. This
world which belongs to sense perceptions cannot be trusted

14
because they are weak. Sense perceptions will not lead us to
universality and objectivity but rather it will lead us with
contingency. A first reality that we can get from this world is
the principle of motion. Motion is everywhere and its principle
is unending idea that everything which is in motion will never
get stability. If there would not be stability then there would
not be certitude of ideas. The inescapability of the world which
is in perpetual motion implies that this world is not stable. A
practical example of the continual change and instability of the
world are the cultural change happening globally.

The famous conception of Thomas Hobbes is the Leviathan.

The Leviathan is the “super government” which we have to obey.
This obedience to this Leviathan is an obedience out of fear.
Living in fear is an anti-political thought. Thus social rules
are created in order for us to obey and in order to prevent any
kind of conflict. According to Hobbes, there are two kinds of
reason why we obey social rules: first, because they are
enforced by the sanctions of the sovereign; and second, because
our desires are such that we prefer to obey the sovereign, in
order to escape death at the hands of the others except where we
are liable to incur it at the hands of the sovereign. This first
kind of obedience is the obedience out of fear from the hands of
the Leviathan. The second kind of obedience implies how to get
what we want, an idea of domination and avoid what we do not
want which is death. Obedience in true democracy does not
dominate nor fear but springs from a conviction that my
obedience to the rules expected of me to obey is doing justice
for myself and for the city-state where I belong.

Furthermore, Hobbes conceived that the city-state is a

collection of individuals whose motives are encircled with their

15
self-interest. According to Hobbes, any regard for the welfare
of the other is only secondary and what is of my own welfare is
primary. This idea sprung from the idea of man in the state of
nature. It is a timeless element within history that man is
always in the state of preserving himself in any circumstance.
For Hobbes, fear is the fear of hindrance and collision with
other people is death and must be avoided. This idea is a strong
support to the anti-political and an extreme contradiction with
the political whose philosophy of leadership is altruistic or
servant leadership or rulership.

Furthermore, Hobbes does not take honor in the idea of

offering one’s life for metaphysical abstractions or for the
country or city-state. Metaphysics is vain philosophy. In
relation to history, ethos of an age depends on abstractions:
“dura lex sed lex.” A famous example of this philosophy is St.
Thomas More. Thomas More got executed because King Henry VIII
would want to annul his marriage with the current queen who
cannot bore him an heir to the throne. This also caused the
division between the Church of England and the Catholic Church.
Anti-political divides and scatters. The wrong application of
the laws leads to the death of the innocent people. The people
is held holy by the political as the subject of rulership.
Metaphysical abstraction leads to war and kill people.

The image of the Leviathan as a giant policemen directing

the traffic of the people is to avoid collision and civil war.
Thus this Leviathan shows a fake face of goodness so that people
will be deceive to pursue what is good and must avoid any form
of contradiction among themselves. This fakery is a very good
position to took over the lives of the people as a whole to whom
we cannot trust to work on their own with one another.

16
 Hobbes refuses human experiences because he views men as
machines which can be automated and programmed by the dictates
of the Leviathan. This is a wrong conception of man for mans is
made of flesh and blood experience and it is unequal to
machines. Despite the brokenness of the world in the end the
world is full of surprises. The fields are composed of wheat and
weeds.

According to Hobbes, there are two laws derived from

reason: first, self-preservation for life and second, endeavor
peace at any cost. Self-preservation is for life. Like animals,
and plants, there are in need to preserve life in order to
survive, men are in need to preserve his life to survive. The
latter seeking peace is avoiding conflict. Avoiding conflict is
avoidance of death. And avoidance of death is self-preservation.

It is noteworthy to name some of the following natural laws

presented in his book The Leviathan. The first natural law is
endeavor peace like aforementioned so as to avoid conflict.
Deplore whatever it takes to achieve peace. The second natural
law states everything is achieved fair. In an all out war,
everything is part of the war. Let the devil be at the behind
most. Unlike Plato, he says that in a war, the winning country
must let the enemy to recover from their lost. The third natural
law states that keep contract made. So as to avoid conflict, man
who is in the state of consciousness and voluntary action must
fulfill the contract made between companies. Despite the dislike
to do fulfill the contract one must fake it in order to keep the
peace. When in you enter into a bargain and realized that you
have been cheated, just to do the bargain and fulfill it in
order to maintain peace. The fourth natural law presents about
gratitude. Gratitude maintains good relations. The fifth natural

17
law is compliance. Compliance is to fake because it is to
portray to the Leviathan a good picture of obedience to the
rules. The sixth natural law is pardon. Think about what will
happen for tomorrow. We must think of the future time. We say to
sorry so as to avoid conflict in the future. The seventh natural
law states “no to retribution.” Retribution creates a cycle of
violence and if we have to fake our feelings in order not to
create a future conflict, we must do it. The eighth natural law
states do not invite hostility to yourself through hatred. An
example of this is to bubble to yourself with speeches
manipulated by hatred. It is a major sin to detract anymore with
stories out of hatred. There are speech act that cannot be
allowed. In order to maintain peace we must not break the
surface. Whatever it is you want to say, keep it to yourself.
Once the surface is broken, life becomes nasty and short. It is
absolutely necessary to preserve the surface in order maintain
the peace that is also absolutely necessary for continual
motion.

Jumping to fourteenth natural law, it states that if things

are impossible to be divided, then use lots. Lots is to give an
equal chance of participation for everyone. The nineteenth
natural law states that you keep everybody happy. Despite
personal feeling and preferences, in order to maintain peace
fake everything so everybody will be happy. This is anti-
political because it stands to abstraction and it comes with a
manual as if man should always live his life following this
manual and not his very capacity to choose. In contrast with the
political, it is towards consultation of other people. Anti-
political is contented with memorizing the preset system of
rules and principles and therefore not consultative. In the end,
there is no soul, only manual.

18
 According to Hobbes, the cause of all wars is metaphysics
versus metaphysics. A very good example of this is the transfer
of Marcos’ remains in the Libingan ng mga Bayani. The transfer
of the remains of the former president and former dictator
creates division among people. There are people who believe that
Marcos is to be given a heroes death deserved to him as the
former president of the Philippines. On the other hand, there
are people who strongly disagree with the idea of his transfer
for he was a tyrant and the dictator. The silent years of
Martial Law is not really silent in terms of the human rights
violations and the killings of the people who are not in favor
of such government structure. Within the Philippines, there
broods conflict among kinsmen and countrymen. It is a clear
agendum of the anti-political that the people are to be
scattered rather than to be united.

V. Conclusion

There is strong distinction between the political and the

anti-political and the mentioned philosophers above gave very
clear tenets opposing the political philosophers like Plato,
Aristotle and Machiavelli. After discussing the views of Rene
Descartes, John Jacques Rousseau and Thomas Hobbes, I came up
with prevalent ideas which summarizes the anti-political.

First, anti-political is a form of escape from the reality

of the world towards metaphysical abstraction. Descartes created
a realm called the cogito which is not the realm of the evil
genius. The realm of illusion. This flight from the world
contradicts what the political hold dear: that despite the
world’s fragmentariness, it is still worth saving or fighting
for.

19
 Second, anti-political believes on the principle of
leadership based on domination. Rationality creates a certain
kind of status in the society where being learned is to dominate
the subordinates and the uneducated. Moreover, Rousseau’s
philosophy of the “General Will” and his acolytes falls under
the conception of domination. People are force to obey and are
forced to be good. Also, Thomas Hobbes’s idea of the Leviathan
is also similar to what the anti-political pursue: the
superiority of one identity who holds the illusionary power of
metaphysical abstraction. The image of the Leviathan is the
model of aggressiveness of the leader to hold power and to feel
superior over his subordinates which is a sign of true
contradiction of the altruist’s type of leadership.

Lastly, anti-political finds good news in isolation rather

than in community building. The top-down movement of the anti-
political is a strong fixation with the metaphysical abstraction
over the real-life situations of the grassroots level. Rousseau
once said that man can be happy when he is alone. The anti-
political does not concern himself with consensus building but
with fakery of individuals in order to avoid conflicts from
fellow citizens. Thus, the anti-political downgrades what the
political holds sacred: language, common good, mutual success
and true democracy.

20