ideas of John Locke

why did locke deny that he wrote the second treatise?

he was scared of persection from the monarchy. the second treatise of government had revolutionary ideas that opposed the monarchy and he did not want to be associated with radicals.

purpose of a Lockean government vs Hobbsean government?

the primary purpose of a Lockean government is to secure equal rights of every individual, maintain justice, and preserve the rights to life, liberty, and estate

the primary purpose of a hobbsean government is to instill fear by an absolute government in order to suppress human nature and maintain order

what did locke believe was the state of nature

all men were free and equal in the state of nature. they shared the same community and people can be satisfied. man is reasonable enough to refrain from stealing (unlike hobbes) so there is not an ongoing struggle for survival. nature provides man with enough to live.

what is the key feature that distinguishes humans

the ability for reason.

what gives us certain unalienable rights

rationality gives humans the right for self-mastery and thus unalienable rights.

equality of condition or opportunity?

equality of opportunity. all men are biologically equal like creatures of the same species, so they should be treated equally. their own actions determine the rest. equality under the law, rule of law.

what allows men to claim property

through their labour and the mixing of their labour with uowned resources in nature. people can not make the most of their life unless their property is secure - human flourishing.

can a person exercise self-mastery or self-rule without property?

no, self-ownership is the foundation for the ownership of external goods. a man owns what he is and is what he owns.

no property = no tools to exercise self-mastery

are there limits to the amount of property a person may own

excess wealth should not spoil. if wealth is being wasted then it should be shared instead.

in the state of nature there are limits to how much people can accumulate.

in civilization currency exists so there are no limits on the accumulation of wealth and property.

what constitutes property?

life, liberty, estate

what have been the economic consequences of the adoption of property rights for those societies that have them?

may create economic inequality, unlimited property accumulation, exploitation of the poor by the rich, economic prosperity is correlated with government protection of rights.

in order for a government’s authority not to be considered oppressive of individual autonomy, what would be required?

consent of the governed to obey the government’s rules. if citizens are following laws made by themselves and thus obeying themselves, they can maintain freedom.

comes from voluntary consent of the citizens.

a true, completely participatory goverment is ideal but there are too many people so representative democracy is the next best option.

consent is required - different definition than hobbes. must be freely and voluntarily given.

what is the difference between those who constitute a society and who constitute that society’s government?

constitute a society - its members who come together naturally.

society’s government - representatives who are elected by the citizens in the society.

a community requires unanimous agreement; if you disagree then you can go to a different community. leaves room for the existence of multiple types of government.

governments do not require unimous agreement/consent, only majority consent to govern.

assumption that if you do not like the government then you may leave, but if you stay you must follow the rules regardless of your feelings.

express vs tacit consent

express consent - actively proclaiming support or loyalty e.g. an oath to the government

tacit consent - consenting by simply living in that socety and reaping its benefits and protections. less binding than express consent.

is it important for a lockean government to be albe to claim that its citizens have consented to being governed?

yes. individual autonomy is very important so the only way to justify political authority is for it to be derived from volunmtary consent of all citizens.

in a community of self-governing citizens every person would obey only himself and would retain the freedom he would have if there was no government.

in obeying the rules of society, men submit only to what they themselves have authorized.

otherwise, the government is not legitimate and people can find a way to disobey the law; no longer flourishing because natural rights are not protected.

how does locke justify a society being governed by the majority?

because each individual contributes one unit of force equal to that of every other individual, the course of action favoured by the majority should prevail because of its greater force.

it is not realisitic to acquire the consent of every individual for every governmental decision and it would be impossible to reach unanimous consent. majority rule is the only way to allow individuals to participate equally in decision making

choose between satisfying more or less (more is better)

not everyone is political → not everyone cares about political decisions.

according to jefferson, what constraint must operate upon the majority in order for them to exercise their political will over the minority.?

their will must be reasonable and there must be laws protecting violations of minority rights or oppression of minorities.

constraints: majority can rule but they cannot take away natural rights.

everyone’s inalienable rights are protected regardless of being majority or minority. the government was created to protect these rights. respecting rights prevents majority tyranny.

what is locke’s opinion of having an absolute concentration of political power?

against it. instead beleves in separation of powers - legislative, judicial, and executive branches of government to prevent the absolute concentration of power among a few.

absolute power allows people’s natural rights to be denied. with separation of powers, people’s natural rights remain inalienable.

what two conditions would prevent arbitrary abuse of power?

1. governmental power must conform to the rule of law - people who make rules must also live by them. no one is above the law.

2. separation of powers must be practices in government.

illiberal governments are chracterized by inequality under the law.

what is prerogative power and justify its use.

prerogative power is the ability to act according to discretion for the public good without the prescription of the law, and sometimes even against it.

conditions:

• it should only be used for the benefit of the public, not for the executive’s own advantage

• should be employed when legislature cannot address an issue due to its infrequency or unforeseen nature

• should only be used when absolutely necessary

certain circumstances make it okay for the executive to disobey the law and form an absolute government - act in the name of safety in case of emergency

opportunity for absolute government if the community thinks it is in constant danger

how did nixon justify his use of prerogative powers as potus?

in war time, a president has certain extraordinary powers which would make acts that would otherwise be unlawful, lawful if undertaken for the purpose of preserving the nation and constitution.

• wategate

how is the prerogative power of the executive justified by locke

while law is fixed it is the nature of things to always be in motion,. prepogative allows for a flexible response to this natural flux. there is not time for consensus or debate in times of emergency; legislatures are slow

what are locke’s three potential constraints of legislatures to justify prerogative power

1. the nature of the legislative power

2. the nature of the people

3. the nature of the law

why did locke argue that the executive’s prerogative powers ar greatest in foreign affairs

such matters cannot be govened by law. executives must be allowed to employ at their discretion the whole force of the community against foreign enemies. powers are for the betterment of the entire community rather than for personal gain.

what did the romans do to deal with emergencies?

appoint a dictator for six months to deal with the emergency. he would not be able to change any formal institutions of government and his term was too short to cause any permanent harm.

what types of rulers should never have to fear a revolution?

wise rulers, because people are slow to come to revolution.

in order for a revolution to be justified what threshold did locke believe needed to be met?

the revolution must be to establish whatever form of government is most likely to serve the public good. arising from the ultimate authority of the people (the majority), not indiviudal men.

revolution is permitted if the government regularly abuses life, liberty and estate. it is better to be briefly without government than to be under a tyrannical government without the natural rights.

where is locke on the political spectrum

right

limits in nature and in govenment

in nature, natural limits: what you can use

in society: money has no limits because your rights to prosper are protected.

locke vs hobbes; state of nature and selfishness

locke: people are selfish but not all the time. it leads to economic prosperity and is a source of our productivity, it can be good

hobbes: we are selfish and that leaves to unending violent conflict. the state of nature must be controlled.

locke vs hobbes; unalienable rights

locke: unalienable right to life, liberty, estate. these are all your property, which includes physical objects and body and intelligence, etc.

hobbes: only the right to life

hobbes vs locke; govenment purpose

locke: maintaining justice and protecting the natural rights.

hobbes: maintain order, not justice because we will never agree on what justice means.

hobbes vs locke; consent

locke: consent must be voluntary and freely given

hobbes: consent can be given through coercion or freely given.

hobbes vs locke: reason

both believe in reason as a mechanism to find the best form of government. reason separates humans from other living things.

hobbes vs locke: authoritarian governments

locke: only allowed during specific times of emergency. otherwise, limited government is best as power is separated.

hobbes: always needed to maintain order. one power, absolute government.

both agree that authority is necessary at some level.

hobbes vs locke: religion

locke: division of governemnt and religion. it is allowed to freely exist but is not part of the system.

hobbes: religion can be used as a tool but never be above the power of the state. used to help establish order.

hobbes vs locke: revolution

locke: only allowed if the government is not protecting the natural rights.

hobbes: never allowed - represents return to human nature

hobbes vs locke: individual vs community

locke: focus on individual rights. if the individual flourishes we can build a flourishing society.

hobbes: focus on community and overall social order

hobbes vs locke: are people equal in the state of nature

yes

locke’s state of nature

god gives the world to men in common. labour gives a man title to property taken from the common.

the amount of property held by anyone is limited to what he can use - it doesnt make sense to hoard and is not conducive to social harmony

there is no conflict over property because there is no reason for anyone to take so much that he infringes on the claims of others

locke’s view of current society

as money is intrdouced, accumulation becomes unlimited as money can be saved and stored. prupose of government becomes to secure and protect the right to property

incentivizes productivity - people will work harder and invest time into increasing their property