John Locke A Legitimate Government

The word Social Contract theory was first used by Thomas Hobbes to define royal authority. However John Locke who wrote the two treaties on government” in the 1680’s reinforce the meaning of a new social contract theory. In his version of social contract, he stated “men surrendered a part of their right to govern them selves in order to enjoy the benefits of the rule of law”(Foner, 149). In his argument, natural right such as life, liberty and proper play a huge role. According to Locke, Government or political system is form by equal individuals (mainly men of a household). Although men surrendered part of their right to govern to enjoy the benefits of the rule of law, they do retain the natural right of protecting of liberty, life and property against any local or foreign enemies. According to Locke and the

In the Second Treatise of Government, John Locke argues that the authority of a legitimate political regime is based on the consent of free, equal, rational and reasonable persons. Locke differentiates between two forms of consent - express and tacit. Express consent is when an individual openly articulates a willingness to join the government. This makes the individual a perpetual citizen / the individual incorporates their person into the commonwealth. Those who have given express consent are unalterably subject to society and are never again at liberty as in the state of nature.

While reading the “The Second Treatise of Government,” you can notice and see that John Locke has a strong standing for civil rights as well as helping with the development of the Constitution of the United States. He states that the “consent of the governed,” is basically saying that communities are not put together by the divine right or ruled by. Paternal, familial, and political are types of powers that John Locke mentions that have all have unlike characteristics. He inspired others to believe in and want equal rights and democracy. John Locke talks about the state of nature, which basically states that no one has the power to be ruler of someone, as well as they are able to do what they want in a freely matter. In other words people are born just like anyone else that is born, and should have equally rights to property, health, and liberty, and that no one should have the power over anyone. Everyone should be able to live and enjoy his or her own freedom and wellbeing. However, the state of nature is not a guarantee to have natural laws, which could help with the protecting of one’s property. According to him having your own personal freedom was the true meaning of state of nature. John Locke thought that people were following his faith in human rationality through the declaration of Locke. John Locke states that if the government takes away from others for them to empower them then the people have right and opportunity to go against

These intellectuals attempted to generate an explanation for the purpose of government and expressed their ideal political structure to find a solution to the inequalities in the distribution of power. The changing intellectual and social perceptions of the human condition led to new insights and questions of the way in which humans were ruled: “Man is born free, and everywhere he is in chains.” (Rousseau 2). This conveys The Philosophe belief that liberty is lost when political rule is too strict, to the point where one is unable to truly live. John Locke deduced in his two Treatises on Government that humans have natural born rights to life, liberty and property (“Hobbes, Locke, Montesquieu and Rousseau on Government”). His ideal government protected these natural rights and permitted the freedom of its people to conduct their lives in a way that they see as best fit. He believed that the government existed to serve the people’s will, thus the power laid in the majority (“Hobbes, Locke, Montesquieu and Rousseau on Government”). Thomas Hobbes had an opposing view to that of Locke’s government. Hobbes advocated for the monarchy and absolutism, as this form provides strong political stability (Elahi 2). He believed that the people were indebted to the government and protected by the ruler, only if they surrendered their rights and freedoms under a social contract (Elahi 3). Jean

Which was also reflected when Jefferson says, ‘’Whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it’’ (104). This means that people have the right or the responsibility a government that is tyrannical. The English Bill of Rights lays down the limits on the powers of the monarch and sets out rights of the parliament including freedom of election, freedom of speech, the requirement to regular elections to Parliament, the right to petition in the monarch without fear of retribution which reflects John Locke’s ‘’Second Treatise of Civil Government’’. John Locke argued that government legitimacy is based on the consent of the governed and on a responsibility to protect natural rights. John argues, “The great and chief end, therefore, of mens uniting into commonwealths, and putting themselves under Government, is the preservation of their Property’’ ( 93).

When thinking about the role of government in society, everyone has different opinions on what part government should play in their lives. In Locke’s, Second Treatise on Civil Government, the governments primary role is to ensure that people achieve equal natural rights and that they protect the property of its citizens. When beginning to think about that idea, it seems relatively simple and a proper position for the government, and it is, but one must dive deeper into the text and develop ones’ own opinions. Locke’s argument that government should protect natural rights and property is a valid argument with its core components; and the arguments that you are able to point out in it such as using property in a beneficial, and humans being fond of material possessions, helps one understand Locke’s argument and makes it stronger. Being able to relate Locke’s aim of government to present day also enhances the overall scope of this particular Lockean argument.

Even though the American colonists are their own entity, the British government still assumed control over the colonies. Situations such as the belief that the Parliament “had the right to impose taxes on the colonists” increased the distaste of the colonies to the British (Boundless). Though the Parliament had virtual representation, or “the members of Parliament spoke for the interests of all British subjects rather than for the interests of only the district that elected them” over the colonies, the colonies argued that since there is no direct representation, or “proposed form of representative democracy where each representative’s vote is weighted in proportion to the number of citizens who have chosen that candidate to represent them”

John Locke was born on August 29, 1632, into a middle class family during late Renaissance England. Locke started his studies at Christ Church in Oxford. He then went into medical studies and received a medical license, which he practiced under Anthony Cooper. They became friends, and when Cooper became Earl of Shaftesbury, Locke was able to hold minor government jobs and became involved in politics. Shaftesbury steered Locke towards the views of a government whose law was fair to all, and all were under the law.

Hobbes’ Leviathan and Locke’s Second Treatise of Government comprise critical works in the lexicon of political science theory. Both works expound on the origins and purpose of civil society and government. Hobbes’ and Locke’s writings center on the definition of the “state of nature” and the best means by which a society develops a systemic format from this beginning. The authors hold opposing views as to how man fits into the state of nature and the means by which a government should be formed and what type of government constitutes the best. This difference arises from different conceptions about human nature and “the state of nature”, a condition in which the human race

In defining political legitimacy, many theorists put forth a distinct set of values that frame their view on the authorities’ right to rule and citizen’s obligation to follow. Theorists such as Hobbes and Locke, both of their account on political legitimacy might look quite similar at first glance, because each theorized about the nature of mankind and the right political systems that would meet the needs of individuals. However, in Hobbes’ perspective, political authority does not pre-exist in individual’s state of nature, rather, it is created by the social contract and serves to ensure self-preservation which is threatened in a state of nature. In contrast, Locke thought that the social contract does not create authority, but that political authority is embodied in individuals and pre-exists in the state of nature, all individuals thus have the moral obligation to respect those rights made by authorities. In my point of view, Locke’s idea sounds more compelling than that of Hobbes’, because it allows individuals to have their own liberties free from an oppressive sovereign and prevents danger posed by absolute freedom.

John Locke (1689) and Thomas Hobbes (2010) share a common underlying concern: establishing a social contract between the government and the governed. To be legitimate, government must rest in the final analysis on the “consent” of the governed, they maintain. They also share a common view of humanity as prone to selfishness (Morgan, 2011 p. 575-800). Given the modern era, Hobbes views of the state of nature and government seem antiquated; no longer do the masses wish to be subservient to anyone man without question. Lockean principals are now the base for today’s modern, just, prosperous and free states.

Regulating a vast population of society with different mindsets and opinions can be extremely difficult. Not all minds will agree on the same decisions. Not all will see the same vision or perspectives. However, in order for a society to thrive and continue to accomplish great matters we all need to some sort of agreement. John Locke, a prestigious philosopher, argued that a government is deemed legit if society consents to the regulations. Locke presents a few ideas of consent – actual and non-actual consent. Actual consent is the agreement by between parties. To the contrary, non-actual consent is essentially an agreement between parties on the grounds that if one party used the resources the other party provided, a non-actual agreement was present. For example, if a man provided his friend with transportation to work every day, then the man providing the transportation has the authority to charge a monthly fee to his friend. This agreement is then a non-actual consent. In other words, the friend has indirectly accepted the fee in exchange for the transportation.

As a result of looking through Thomas Hobbes’ view on monarchy and John Locke’s view on democracy, both perspectives provide a vast amount of information of an ideal government. In Locke’s book, Second Treatise of Government, chapter 11 is devoted to legislative power, which Locke identifies as the most important part of the government. Locke provides rules for this legislative power. The first is the preservation of society. No one can challenge the power of the legislative body, or pass laws of their own. This power is invested in the body of the majority. In this chapter, he brings up a constant

The original Social Contract tradition has had many authors, but for the purposes of this paper I will focus on John Locke’s work as one political system that might be used by a nation and the problems it entails that would have to be discussed for modern uses. Locke begins by describing a state of nature that entails equality and a state of perfect freedom for mankind to live as they want within the laws of nature (Locke 2009, 370). Locke’s work argues for his view of property, where a man has the right to the fruits of his labor but not to another man’s (Locke 2009, 372). In his view, the government is meant to prevent on man from seeking punishment that is unfit for the committed crime and that people join together for protection for themselves and their property (Locke 2009, 371-372). He argues also that no one man should be in charge and that a democracy should be used instead (Locke 2009, 371).

The proclaimed “Father of Liberalism,” John Locke, is an essential figure to study. If not for his sheer amount of philosophical knowledge, then for the profound impact that he has had on the structure of America’s government. In The Second Treatise of Civil Government, Locke rejects the status quo and opts for a key principle in government that monarchies simply do not have: a social contract. However, before a social contract is created, people must undergo the state of nature; a place of “perfect freedom to order their actions, and dispose of their possessions and persons” (Chapter 2, Section 4). John Locke skillfully uses the state of nature as a starting point to explain how a reasonable government and civil society are created. The state of nature is the essential beginning that any society must take at first. From this, we see the emergence of natural freedoms; our rights to life, liberty, and property; and how a government may limit those for our own benefit.