To trigger off any philosophy on what should be the characteristics of the state we must first imagine living in a state of nature (living with the lack of a state). Since we cannot trace back to any time that we've been without government, we must imagine what it would be like in a state of nature. What are people like with the absence of a state? There have been many views in answering this question, therefore there have been many differences in views for what the ideal state should be and serve as.
             A character of a state is described to best remedy for the deficiency of the State of Nature, as Hobbes came up with his pessimistic state of nature in which life is solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short. Hobbes' view started off when he stated that the first principle of human behavior was egoism, or self-interest, and it was this egoism, that was the root of all social conflict. Although Hobbes stated that all people are roughly equal, still, if someone has more, others have less. The insecurity regarding what you can keep leads to violence. "Where there are no restraints on people's actions, it leads to the war of 'all against all'" says Hobbes. So, Hobbes is basically saying, any state is better than the state of nature, be glad that the state is there. Even if it is a corrupt state, you will benefit more from the corrupt state than you would from the State of Nature, which is completely lawless.
             However, this vision of society which leaves power out of the hands of the people and leads to criticisms from philosophers such as Locke, who counters Hobbes with his own ideas of the state of nature. In Locke's State of Nature the State of Nature is ordered by the Laws of Nature, including your Natural Rights to Life, Liberty, and Property. If a man works a piece of land and makes it better and more valuable or useful, it becomes his property. This posses
             ...