John Locke's Second Practise On Government

Imagine a world were only one person had the sovereignty of a nation through his bloodline and was not chosen by the people of the nation. This form of government is known as absolute monarchism which was practiced since the beginning of the middle ages till this day (Pope Francis, Vatican City). When it comes to a monarchy, it is composed of an individual(s) (king or queen) who reigns till his death and has a divine right appointed by God to be the ruler. The divine right was a doctrine that plead in favor of absolute monarchism, which means that the power of the rulers came by God’s authority and could not be downsized by any earthly organization such as the government or even the parliament. The Queen Elizabeth I, ‘The Virgin Queen’, also

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.

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

Monarchies have lasted in a society, because of the king taking order of the people. There is a lack of trust between a

"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.

The king and queen are in charge of the absolute Monarchy and have all the power. The king and queen are also in charge of the constitutional Monarchy but have no power. The absolute Monarchy became in charge by inheriting the throne .The constitutional Monarchy became in charge by inheriting the frame. The absolute Monarchy remained in charge until they die. The constitutional Monarchy remain in charge until they quit,die,or lose the election. No, the laws are not made and enforced in the absolute Monarchy because people aren’t fair. The constitutional Monarchy’s laws are made and enforced because people are all treated equally. In the absolute Monarchy no, not all people are treated equally because 1 person does anything and everything.

To stabilize the security, historical contexts are always involved to define a large and small society, where the majority are probably gonna use their powers in the small one. However the power must be independent of the majority, otherwise it cannot protect and contain the majority. This way to solve the problem that probably will not work prevailed in all the governments with hereditary and self-appointed representatives. Ruling by these “methods” where with a single blow everything can finish it up in more problems, makes Madison avoid at any cost the term “tyrant”. In any case, the idea is that especially in republics where freedom interested the majority, citizens maybe can wish to call for the monarchy because of stability and security that a strong man can bring to the

John Locke and the founding father did not include every single right in the Constitution, however, that does not mean that a right can be claimed without the people’s consent. In the Second Treatise of Government, John Lock discusses the prerogative right that a President can claim. The prerogative right is the right of a president to “act according to discursion for the public good” . Executive Privilege is not usually an issue when the President acts in the common good of individuals because most individuals understand why the action is taken. When an action is for the public good, “the people are very seldom or never scrupulous or nice in the point or questioning of prerogative whilst it is in any tolerable degree employed for the use it

Also if there is a smooth running society that has no political oppression or any political warfare there would be no reason for a monarch to abuse their powers. There would have to be a reason for a monarch to abuse their powers. They would have to either be mentally ill or stressing from either political warfare or oppression. For a monarch to abuse their powers they would most likely be a valid reason why. Monarchy has worked for thousands of years and yes there have been many monarchs that go down into history as bad monarchs, but that's just another reason why people study history so that we don’t make the same mistakes as we did in the past.

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.

A monarch is in control. You are being what to do by someone you do not even want ruling your country. What could you do? This is how your world works, it’s always worked like this, so why change it? Simply change it because you are unhappy with the way the world is, you deserve to enjoy the country you live in. That there, change the society, is exactly what the Enlightenment thinkers wanted to do. The Enlightenment thinkers are a group of people who found countless flaws in the way people decided to run the countries. Therefore, of all the Enlightenment thinkers, I believe John Locke, David Hume, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau impacted the world the most due to them having a full grasp on the ideologies of humanity.

They should feel their wrath, and their stability to be powerful. The amount of power a monarch can take has

The article The Powers of Monarch in England was about the state of the monarchy is the highest thing on earth. There are three main ideas about the state of Monarchy, which are delivering the Word of God, establishments of policy and philosophy. Kings were treated as gods and even in the scriptures were referred to as gods. The reason kings were called and treated as if they were god is that they exercise their power upon the place they were ruled by deciding on major actions. For example, kings could decide on anything like sentencing someone to death, creating or destroy anything, being a judge, and anything godlike at the king’s desire.

The British Empire was one of the most influential and powerful empires the world had ever seen. It spanned great lengths and reached the vast corners of the globe. Part of Britain’s success was due to its implementation of a Constitutional Monarchy. This form of government allowed much of the ruling to be done by others while maintaining the power of the king. This system is not used today, but many of the British colonies still respect the queen and her rulings. This being said the queen doesn’t actually have any power and is used as a figure head to give more power to the people and the parliament. The reason why this is the best type of government is because it compiles all three sections of people, it outlines what people can and cannot

Monarchies have shifted to less political importance over the years in favor to parliament and a democratically elected prime minister. The film The Queen is a great example of the limited power of Queen Elizabeth II in present-day and shows the ceremonial purposes of her role. The main reasons that this role shift has happened is because monarchs abused their unlimited power repeatedly. Oliver Cromwell was one man who did not like the way his King, Charles I, was controlling the country and decided to do something about it. What some find startling is that Charles I reign ended by being sentenced to death, and by being beheaded under the weight of an axe.