Hobbes defined liberty as the mere absence of legal coercion.

Evidence

This way of conceiving of liberty—and it was a great novelty in its time—led Hobbes to argue that law is always itself an invasion of people’s liberty, however benign in the long term. He observes that freedom in the sense of non-coercion—freedom, as he sees it, in the relevant sense—is always invaded by the coercive laws imposed by a state, whatever the nature of that state. The upshot is that people only have freedom in the silence of the laws; they have freedom only where law does not intrude. — Philip Pettit, Republicanism, 201

Categorization

• DEFINE: This is the negative-liberty contrast Pettit builds his republican theory against.
• XREF: connects to: Hobbes redefined liberty as the absence of coercion rather than non-domination — Philip Pettit, Republicanism: A Theory of Freedom and…, 200; Hobbes held that law always invades liberty regardless of its character; Negative liberty means being free from interference in one’s choices. — Frank Lovett, Republicanism, 7 (+1 more)

Broader Connections

• Hobbes redefined liberty as the absence of coercion rather than non-domination #corroborates (0.92) — Philip Pettit, Republicanism, 200
• Hobbes held that law always invades liberty regardless of its character #expands (0.85)
• Negative liberty means being free from interference in one’s choices. #expands (0.80) — Frank Lovett, Republicanism, 7