Is there a mutual relationship between protection and obedience?

Note: Your initial post should have a minimal word count of 500 words. (Note: For your 500 word minimum word count, make sure that you only count your words, and not the words of the prompt.) Please put the word count in brackets at the end of your initial post.
<
<
For your initial post, in a manner that is both concise and complete, do the following:
<
<
(1) Give a basic outline of the reading and position of Hobbes’ contractarianism.
<
<
(2) Give a basic account of the justifications Hobbes gives for his position.
<
<
It is thought by many legal and political scholars that civil societies are the product of implicit contracts between people and their governments, whereby all parties implicitly agree to mutually beneficial rules and laws for the benefit of all.
<
<
Keeping this in mind, and according to your understanding of Hobbes’ social contract theory, answer the following questions:
<
<
(3) Is there a mutual relationship between protection and obedience? Explain your answer.
<
<
(4) Keeping your response to the above question in mind, when a person breaks a rule or violates a law (even a small one, like speeding), are they essentially electing that they be thrown back into a state of nature? Yes or no? If breaking a small rule or law is not by itself implicitly electing to be thrown back into a state of nature, is there a threshold that, once crossed, would change this? If so, what is it? Explain your answer.
<
<
(5) What do you think the outcome would be if in mass people started to violate the law, and can you think of any events or instances where in contemporary times society has at moments teetered on, or even partially reentered, a state of nature? Give some examples.
<
<
(6) Are we more free in a state of nature where there are no laws and it is everyone for themselves (i.e., the freedom and right to do whatever you want), or in civil society where some of our freedoms are surrendered for the sake of maintaining others? We might ask this question in a different way: Where are we most free? In a state of nature or as a member of a civil society? For example, it is thought by contractarians that although we might give up the freedom to do anything at all such as murder, lie, steal, cheat, etc., by doing so we make way for security and peace, and the freedoms that allow us to pursue our lives, our personal goals, and the possibility to flourish in harmony with others. What do you think? Explain your answer.
<
<
***PLEASE USE THE SOURCES PROVIDED**