Thomas Hobbes advocated for the adoption of monarchy as the best form of government in his political philosophy writings particularly in his book, the Leviathan. Hobbes gives his arguments in support of the monarchy mainly through the adoption of the principle of the state of war (Hobbes 12). According to him, man is naturally violent, and thus, there is a need for the establishment of an authoritative government in the form of a monarchy to check and contain the violent nature of man. This paper tries to give an analytical argument against Hobbes’ choice of a monarchy as the best form of government. This will be done by firstly highlighting the main points used by Hobbes in his support for this type of governance, while at the same time identifying flaws and fallacies in these particular arguments fronting for the adoption of monarchy as a form of governance (Kraus 69). Thomas Hobbes begins his defense for the adoption of monarchy as the best form of government by firstly exploring the concept of power. Here, Hobbes identifies two forms of power, namely: instrumental and natural power. According to Hobbes, natural power emanates from the physical or mental ability of an individual, whereas instrumental power is acquired by fortune, which subsequently serves as a means to the acquisition of more power in the form of wealth. According to Hobbes, life is purely a continuous struggle to acquire power. All human beings are in Hobbes view, endowed with equal levels of natural power (Kraus 67). Due to this equality, every individual makes an attempt to gain more instrumental powers to enable him or her compete with others within a state. People are ever striving to enhance their security and reputation, thus leading to chaos within the society. These ambitions if not well checked by an authoritative government easily lead to a state of war, hence men fights against their fellow men. I therefore rise against Hobbes ideology of Monarchy form of governance as the most significant form of leadership, since in such state of nature that is depicted being flaunt of chaos, there is nothing beneficial can take place in this state of nature. Furthermore, War and other form of chaotic conditions bring destruction of properties and deprivation of lives, which at the end of the makes lives of the masses from the community to remain miserable. The only remedy to the chaotic state of nature is the creation of a form of authority in which the implementation rules regulations checks the excessive application of men’s power. This authority can only be created through the conferment of all people’s individual power to a single man or a group of men with the authority to make decisions for and on behalf of every member of the society or state (Baumgold 79). The state of nature as presented by Hobbes may not be visible in the real world because the mere absence of a government is not a better reason to transform human beings to beasts as is the case in the state of war. In addition, Hobbes uses the ability of the monarchy to compel its subjects as the best way to prevent the state of war. However, the ability to instill fear among the subjects cannot be the best way to preven