John Locke: The Two Treatises Of Government

In 1981, the nation was a loose confederation of states, which each operated like an independent country. The government had no judicial branch or executive officer. It lacked the authority to enforce its requests for money or troops from states. Since recently earning independence, the founders and public sought to protect the following in the Constitution: freedom of speech, freedom of press, freedom of religion, the right to bear arms, the right to not be subject to unreasonable seizures or searches, the right to not be forced to quarter soldiers, the right to due process of the law, the right to a fast and public trial by jury with counsel, the right to a civil trial by jury, the right to not be subjected to excessive bail and cruel punishment, and protection of state’s rights. Current protections and responsibility of states and Americans found in the U.S. Constitution were based upon John Locke’s Second Treatise of Government, the Magna Carta, and the English Bill of Rights.

John Locke and Karl Marx, two of the most renowned political philosophers, had many contrasting views when it came the field of political philosophy. Most notably, private property rights ranked high among the plethora of disparities between these two individuals. The main issue at hand was whether or not private property was a natural right. Locke firmly believed that private property was an inherent right, whereas Marx argued otherwise. This essay will examine the views of both Locke and Marx on the subject of private property and will render insight on whose principles appear more credible.

John Locke was perhaps one of the most influential political philosophers of the modern period. In the Second Treatise of Government, John Locke discusses the move from a state of nature and perfect freedom to a then governed society in which authority is given to a legislative and executive power. His major ideas included liberalism and capitalism, state of nature, state of war and the desire to protect one’s property.

What would the American government be like today if it was not for the mind and political theory of John Locke? Some historians and philosophers believe that without John Locke our government would only be a shadow of what it is today. Arguably, one of his most important political and philosophical works was his Two Treatises of Government. There he argues that the function of the state is to protect the natural rights of its citizens, primarily to protect the right to property. John Locke, in many eyes, can be viewed as one of the father’s of Democracy. He embraced many of ideas in his theories on the state of nature and the rise of political society today. In Locke’s political society,

In chapter two of John Locke’s Second Treatise of Government, the idea of a natural law is introduced, and with this law, Locke brings forward several implications of how government is formed and run. Before there was government, everyone had equal rights, and land was a god given right to be shared by everyone. When people began to organize, they consented to give up certain rights to receive certain benefits. Locke argues that this is natural, as since men are equal, “all the power and jurisdiction is reciprocal” (sec. 4). If every man provides help for others, everyone benefits. So, even though not everything is perfectly shared and distributed, equality remains, but is balanced through a more complex system.

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

The Second Treatise of Government provides Locke's theorizes the individual rights and involvement with the government; he categorizes them in two areas -- natural rights theory and social contract. 1.Natural state; rights which human beings are to have before government comes into being. 2.Social contact; when conditions in natural state are unsatisfactory, and there's need to develop society into functioning of central government.

In Locke’s Second Treatise of Government, he defines his view of private property. He states that the earth belongs to all men in common,

Locke believes that there are limitations on that property. Locke believes that God has given us all things richly, and that man may use those things as long as he takes what he needs. Men can have property as long as they obtained it rightfully, and as long as they use discretion. If those limitations were overlooked when the person was getting the property the property was not obtained rightfully.

"Our Revolutionary Army took on the greatest superpower of the time," said Colin Powell, former United States Secretary of State and retired four-star general of the United States Army in an interview discussing the Revolutionary War. The British settlers in America became increasingly self-sufficient and felt the British Crown was forcing high tax and denying them their civil liberties. Clearly, the British saw the colonies as a nation they could threaten. However, with a fresh enlightened perspective American 's saw the British Crown 's action as unjustly and would rebel against the crown. Eventually, The British superpower would be defeated by an unruly, inexperienced, divided America to prevail over the world 's mightiest monarch of that time.

Locke disagrees with this greedy situation as according to his theory, there would be no competition amongst men. Men, by the law of nature are only be allowed to appropriate and own as much as he could use because those resources would end up rotting and being wasted, leading to a liable punishment. Consequently there is never any excessive ownership of land or resources. Therefore other people still have plenty resources to appropriate and thus there is no need for quarrelling. Locke’s argument for appropriating labour is based on the principle that each person is free to appropriate land in the same way as the previous person.

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.

Locke also discusses the limitations on private property. One must leave enough for others and take only as much as one can use (Locke, §33). He then applies this to acquiring land. Locke writes,

Locke thinks the same that in such cases, the inhabitant do value the land until there is no room enough for them in that space – problems with this sentence. Only in this case, people start, all in consent, distinguishing the property.

If people other than the feudal lords were capable of owning the land they worked, the Aristocracy would lose it means of control. Locke stated that “whatsoever then he removes out of the state that nature hath provided, and left it in, he hath mixed his labour with, and joined to it something that is his own, and thereby make it his property.” The peasant deserve the land of his labor. Working a field is what made the field owned, not some privilege from Scripture.