The hobbesian state of nature is permanent diplomatic representation, not actual war

Evidence

We can therefore see how and why this state—and it is not a battle or a direct clash of forces, but a certain state of the interplay of representations—is not a stage that man will abandon forever once the State is born; it is in fact a sort of permanent backdrop which cannot not function, with its elaborate wiles and its complex calculations, once there is nothing to provide security, to establish differences, and finally to give the strength to one side and not the other. So, for Hobbes, it does not all begin with war. — Michel Foucault, Society Must Be Defended, 109

Categorization

• DEFINE: Corrects a common misreading: Hobbes’s state of nature is a chronic interplay of representations and threats, forever functioning, never a one-time battle.
• XREF: connects to: Sovereignty by institution is founded on representation, not on transferred rights — Michel Foucault, Society Must Be Defended, 110; Hobbes’s theory aimed to eliminate the problem of conquest from politics — Michel Foucault, Society Must Be Defended, 114

Related

• Hobbes denies war any role in founding sovereignty (similarity 0.85)
• Hobbes’s theory aimed to eliminate the problem of conquest from politics (similarity 0.82)
• War is the permanent underpinning of social institutions; this is Hobbes’s great adversary. (similarity 0.82)
• Hobbes’s social contract theory suppressed a discourse of permanent civil war (similarity 0.82)
• Sovereignty by institution is founded on representation, not on transferred rights (similarity 0.78)

Broader Connections

• Sovereignty by institution is founded on representation, not on transferred rights #responds-to (0.75) — Michel Foucault, Society Must Be Defended, 110
• Hobbes’s theory aimed to eliminate the problem of conquest from politics #complicates (0.75) — Michel Foucault, Society Must Be Defended, 114