John Locke:

Second Treatise On Civil Government

The Beginning Of An Experiment In Democracy

BY: Seth Heath

12/10/2001

“Man being born, as has been proved, with a title to perfect freedom, and an uncontrolled enjoyment of all the rights and privileges of the law of nature, equally with any other man, or number of men in the world.”(Cohen, 38) Does this quotation sound familiar? How about this one “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”(National) The first is from Second Treatise On Civil Government written by John Locke in 1690, the second quotation was penned by Thomas Jefferson in June of 1776 and is from The Declaration of Independence. The influence John Locke had on the founders of our country is apparent in the similarities of the quotes above. Having been exploited by the monarchy of England our founding fathers strongly identified with the concepts John Locke presented in his Second Treatise On Civil Government. With the impact Locke’s work on the formation of our countries guiding principles it behooves us to investigate this great man’s writing in depth.

We haven’t the time nor the energy to examine his entire works so we will analyze a section of Locke’s Second Treatise On Civil Government provided in Princeton Readings On Political Thought, edited by Cohen and Fermon. In this work Locke concentrates on several principles. He begins by establishing individual liberty and equality as innate in all men. Locke then demonstrates how government and the state gain legitimacy by the people allowing them to assume their natural power. Once the power of the people is vested in the state, the state can utilize all people in community to protect the rights of each other. The reason the people surrender their power is to create a civil society in which all members can be secure in their property. In order to have a civil society all men must be subject to the same rules and laws. Locke argued that a representative government, not royal decree, should create rules and laws. He felt that since the King was not subject to the same rules as everyone else this created a position in which no man was truly in civil society. He reasoned that the primary purpose of the laws that do exist is to control the lower class so as to propagate their exploitation by their masters. Locke firmly believed that all men were born equals and should be provided the same rights.

One thing that I would like to address immediately is the position Locke took on patriarchal society. Locke believed that women should be subservient to men and that they were happy in this role. I personally feel that Locke’s views on this subject are directly attributable to the era in which he lived. In the United States slaves were granted the vote prior to women. This illustrates the mentality of the age. Locke’s radical ideas concerning the power structure of the 17^th century demonstrated a desire to increase the freedom of the people. Locke concentrates and mentions only men in his writings simply because the possibility of equal rights for women were implausible in the society in which he lived. Non-property holding men had no rights let alone women of the time. I feel that had Locke lived in the 21^st century he would have been a proponent of equality among the sexes. If one is to take every time Locke uses the word “men/man” and replace it with “people/person” it is obvious how narrow the difference between his time and ours truly is. I prefer to examine the writings of Locke in the context of his time and apply those concepts as they fit today.

Once one gets past the prolific use of commas and semi-colons to the meat of the work it is easy to see why Locke was ahead of his time. In 17^th century England the people still believed, by choice or not, that the King ruled by divine right. The divine right of the King meant that he was directly appointed by God and so answered solely to God. In return all of the people, or subjects, were subordinate to the King, and the King’s word was law, just or not. This meant that all people living within the kingdom served the king. To John Locke there was something wrong with this arrangement.

Locke strongly believed that the purpose of government was to serve the people. In the opening paragraph he says, “Man being born, as has been proved, with a title to perfect freedom, and an uncontrolled enjoyment of all the rights and privileges of the law of nature, equally with any other man”(Cohen, 38) Locke felt that all men were born equal, from the King to the peasant. Locke focused primarily on the individuals right to protect his property, which Locke defines as “his life, liberty and estate”(Cohen, 38) With Locke’s strong commitment to individual rights it follows that he also felt that the role of government is to protect those rights.

When man existed in what Locke refers to as “a state of nature” he had the power to right wrongs committed against him in what ever manner he saw fit, “even with death its self”(Cohen, 38) Locke refers to this as “natural power”. Natural power exists in the individual and represents his ability to do as he desires and be held accountable only to the natural powers of individuals he interacts with. In a state of nature he who swings the biggest sword the fastest is right. This lack of uniform justice creates a situation that begets anarchy. To remedy the inequality that exists within the state of nature, Locke argues, people join civil societies. In a civil society it is necessary for all the people within that society to forfeit the “natural power” innate in all men to the state. Locke states this by saying: “Where ever therefore any number of men are so united into one society, as to quit every one of his executive power of the law of nature, and to resign it to the public, there and only there is a political or civil society.”(Cohen, 39) The purpose of political society is to establish a society in which people can be secure in their individual property. Without the natural power of all individuals in society relegated to the state the state has no power to protect individual property. By giving their natural power to the state the people are agreeing to abide by the rules of that society. Once all individuals within society surrender their natural power to the state then, and only then, can the state assume the ability to protect property. With the natural power of all people within society invested in the state the state has the ability to create laws.

Locke states, “the community comes to be umpire, by settled standing rules, indifferent, and the same to all parties; and by men having authority from the community, for the execution of those rules,”(Cohen, 38). By making this statement Locke is speaking about several things. First, he is talking about equality among all people, and the importance of an objective legislative and judicial system. Second, he is addressing the issue of executive privilege. Third, he illustrates that the power of government is drawn from the people. Fourth, that the government, representing the people, has the power to administer the laws and rules of that community in protection of the people in the community, this is where he derives justification for war.

Justice and equality are necessary to achieve true liberty. The primary concern of Locke is the protection of “property, that is… life, liberty and estate”(Cohen, 38) He feels that the best way to achieve equal protection of all men is by direct representation by “men having authority from the community”(Cohen, 38). Locke proposes that in order to have a civil society there must be an impartial judiciary and legislative. The legislative represents the interest of the people and is responsible for creating laws that are fair and apply equally to all people within the political/civil society. The judicial enforces the laws developed by the representatives. The primary concern of the judicial is to apply these laws to all people within the society impartially and equally with an eye for justice. The purpose of the judicial is to enable the people to have a venue in which to resolve their differences. The same differences that would have been solved individually in the state of nature are now resolved before the judiciary. Locke states that this structure of government is how “to discern, who are, and who are not, in political society together.”(Cohen, 38)

If the same rules and laws bind all men in a society then, Locke declares, exists a civil society. To the contrary “wherever there are any numbers of men, however associated, that have no such decisive power to appeal to, there they are still in the state of nature.” This is where Locke presents the issue of absolute monarchy and the divine right of the king. By placing “For he being supposed to have all, both legislative and executive power in himself (the ruler) alone, there is no judge to be found, no appeal lies open to any one”(Cohen, 39) This meant that without a democratic society man still exists in a state of nature. In a state of nature man has the right to protect his property to the best of his ability. In the case of monarchy the King has a disproportiante amount of power, and thus steals the very right to defend property away from the people and leaves them no redress for grievances. As mentioned in the discussion on divine right, an absolute ruler has no one to answer to for his actions.

To demonstrate this Locke states:

He that would have been insolent and injurious in the woods of America, would probably not be much better on the throne; where perhaps learning and religion shall be found out to justify all that he shall do to his subjects, and the sword presently silence all those who dare question it. (Cohen, 40)

In short, the absolute monarch is just as much a human as any, except he uses a claim of divine right to justify his behavior and violence to force those who question it into submission. This use of force, this policy of might makes right, is the state of nature.

In order to exist outside of the state of nature government must consist of, “men having authority from the community.”(Cohen, 38)

Despite the fact that in situations where divine rule, or any other form of tyranny, is present there often exists methods for subjects to redress grievances against one another, there is no place for them to seek justice for wrongs committed by the ruler. He points out that the reason these limited forms of justice exist is to prevent the subjects from hurting each other.

For this is no more than what every man, who loves his own power, profit, or greatness, may and naturally must do, keep those animals from hurting, or destroying one another, who labor and drudge only for his pleasure and advantage; and so are taken care of, not out of any love the master has for them, but love of himself, and the profit they bring him. (Cohen, 40)

Locke argues that men enter into a political or civil society with the intent of creating a society in which they can be secure in their property. This civil/political society is created when all men agree to let the state exercise their natural power on their behalf. In return the state agrees to employ this power in a manner that is just to all existing within that society.

When conditions of inequality exist Locke feels that man reverts to a state of nature. These conditions can result from having an absolute ruler or one group that is exempt from the laws of civil society. With this person or persons existing outside of the rules of society they are free to behave however they wish and not suffer the consequences that would be meted out to others in the same situation. In a situation such as this those being oppressed have the right to rebel against the tyranny of this absolute. This power to through of the bonds of oppression is drawn from the state of nature its self. For in the state of nature man has the right to protect his property. When absolute power infringes upon that right all men have the natural right to resist the oppression. In cases such as this the government of the people has the responsibility to defend civil society.

In order to protect them from tyrants and totalitarian regimes Locke says that the government, elected by the people, can call people living in the society to execute the will of that society. For the people of the civil/political society have, “given a right to the commonwealth to employ his (their) force, for the executions of the judgment of the commonwealth, whenever he (they) shall be called to it.”(Cohen, 39) This duty of the citizen to defend the rules and laws of society affects all people within it. In cases where citizens of the society have been wronged by foreign nations this principle allows the government to require all people of that society to right the wrong committed against the one/many member(s) in the form of war. In cases where the crime is against a fellow citizen the principle requires that civil society assist, as required, in the prosecution of the convicted person. By fulfilling this obligation society insures the existence of a peaceful society in which all people can be secure in their individual properties. Free from fear of violence from their fellow citizen, their government and international neighbors.

From past to present John Locke’s political philosophies and ideas have had a profound impact on our nation. A radical while he lived his ideas have become an essential characteristic of Americana. He felt that in order for all people to have liberty and security we must all sacrifice those very things to some extent, this is what makes a civil society.

Works Cited

Cohen, Mitchell. Fermon, Nicole. Editors. Princeton Reading in Political Thought.

New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1996

National Archives and Records Administration. The Declaration of Independence.

Online: 12/02/2001

Available: http://www.nara.gov/exhall/charters/declaration/declaration.html

Oregon State University. Philosophy 302. Online: 12/07/2001

Available: http://www.orst.edu/instruct/phl302/philosophers/locke.html

Bibliography

Unknown Author. A Necessary Evil: A History of American Distrust of Government.

New York: Simon Schuster, 1999.