Thomas Hobbes attempts to explain and classify the nature of man into three categories. These are competition, diffidence and glory. The three classifications have been used to quantitatively describe the foundation of western political philosophy. In terms of the modern political power, Hobbes (57) notes that natural power emanates from either the body or mind. However, regardless of the source of power, the degree of eloquence, nobility, literacy as well as strength are prudent. Additionally, the author asserts that the way power is exercised in the current political world is largely divided into two main areas namely natural and civil powers (Hobbes 57). The two types of powers constitute the commonwealth and largely depend on willingness of parties involved. However, the most predominant theme portrayed by Thomas Hobbes in Leviathan is that the natural state of man in leadership is war. The latter is perceived as the point at which man can gain and cling to power whether legally or illegally. Most importantly, Thomas Hobbes highlights the overall importance of monarchy and its state of rule. On the other hand, Mills has also provided a very interesting perspective of power and leadership. It is against this background that this paper analyzes major ideas conceptualized by Thomas Hobbes on Leviathan and today’s leadership as well as John Stuart Mill’s perception on modern leaders. Leadership and condition of ‘war’ On leviathan, Thomas Hobbes is categorical that men live in awe and in a continuous state of war. In most cases, the concept of living in war is not all about hurting others. It refers to fierce competition that helps people rise to power and maintain the glory associated with leadership. War is described by Hobbes as the political and moral philosophy that men carry along in their quest for leadership. This is the kind of today’s leaders and the nature of leadership as portrayed by Thomas Hobbes. The series Lost season 2 exemplifies this theme and it is played throughout to the end after a tumultuous 48 day period. Thomas Hobbes is categorical that civil wars are not only in battle fields. Neither is the act demonstrated in fighting per se. It is also evident during in-fighting among mankind as they try to sustain themselves in power. In the present world, there is a strong will to contend in the political battles even though the fruits are quite often uncertain. Absolute monarchy as ideal form of governance Thomas Hobbes advocated for unrestrained and pure monarchy as ideal forms of governance. According to Finn (66), the political agenda of Thomas Hobbes could be described as inclined to influence and political relevance. His philosophies were that a monarch government has the ability to exert lots of influence and real political relevance. However, Thomas Hobbes is clear that monarchy does not provide the much needed forms of governance that can result into targeted development. He continues to argue that most of the leadership challenges that come along with governance are not attributable to this form of government (Finn 65). Most problems tend to be similar whether in aristocracy or in democracy. This form of governance is capable of producing security for the people and peace (Finn 58). The present leadership has leaders who can destroy peace and tranquility of a country. Th