John Locke & His Influence on Early America

John Locke remains one of the most influential writers in the history of governmental philosophy.  His writings proved instrumental to the drafting of the United States constitution by Thomas Jefferson in 1787.  Although many of the founding fathers were not well versed in the political theory of Locke, his influence on Thomas Jefferson proved invaluable and eventually served as an undeniable backbone to United States government.  Locke claimed that legislative bodies are to govern with blind impunity, as to not vary in the treatment of specific groups of people, but to apply the law in an even handed way toward everyone.  Locke’s influence can be seen in the United State’s Constitution’s intent to be for the good of the people, as Locke stated that there is no other logical purpose for laws and legislative bodies.

Locke describes the state of nature very explicitly in his writings, claiming that the nature of society is in essence, anarchic, and that although people are innately free, they are undeniably subject to the unchangeable laws of nature so that a legislature should govern according to these laws alone.  Locke goes on to describe the reasons for government itself, and exposes the many reasons men decide to leave the state of nature in exchange for a politically structured society.  He argues the laws of nature are ill enforced in the state of nature itself, and that humans have a natural obligation to defend these laws by organizing themselves into societies, or legislative bodies. 

Locke also clarifies the conditions under which a government may be removed from power by the people.  In his discussion of “social contract” Locke states that the people give up certain freedoms in exchange for a stable government that rules according to the laws of nature.  However, when a government forfeits its obligation to rule according to these laws, the people have the inalienable right to destroy the government in lieu of a more appropriate legislative body.  Many of Locke’s principles found their way into the democratic constitutions the world around, as well as in the supporting minds of several founding fathers of the United States, such as Thomas Jefferson.  Locke’s philosophical works, along with those of such men as Hobbes and Voltaire, served as the inspiration for a government for the people.

Locke’s state of nature is in stark contrast to many of the other political philosophers of his time.  While Hobbes wrote in a similar fashion about the miserable human condition, Locke argues that although the state of nature does not actively enforce its own laws, humans are still obligated to create situations in which these laws may be properly followed.  No one is exempt from these laws of nature, and if a government fails to uphold them in an effective way, it is surely not a government at all.   Locke’s description of the state of nature borders the ideas of anarchy, but does not explicitly use these terms.  No individual of the state may deprive another of the freedom to choose, however, men are not entirely free to do what they please if it is in contrast to the laws of nature. 

Locke states that the state of nature leaves humanity vulnerable to continual dangers, and that men, however free they may be in this state, are constantly subject to attacks on their liberty that they are powerless to defend against.  Thus the state of nature is one of constant fear and despair, and that the extreme nature of this freedom is not conducive to a functional human population in any way.  Locke does not go as far as Hobbes in describing the dangers that the state of nature offers, but does use this state to his advantage when he describes the purpose of organized government.  In short, Locke concludes that nature indeed has an undeniable set of laws, however, it lacks the power to defend these laws in the face of a human population.  Locke argues that the state of nature itself, unbridled freedom, does exist, and that it exists in any situation in which a government acts tyrannically, illogically, or erratically in a way that contrasts the natural law.

            Locke argues that the nature of government is a defense against the brutal and unforgiving state of nature.  In the state of nature, men are free to do as they please, but are left entirely vulnerable to the whims of more powerful humans.  This violates the laws of nature that Locke claims the state of nature lacks the authority to enforce.  People tend to leave the state of nature and thus give up their unbridled freedom in order to protect themselves from intrusions on their natural rights.  This is the very essence of government and the main focus of Locke’s second treatise.  The people have the obligation to organize into legislative bodies in order to defend the laws of nature that govern them regardless.  Political societies are to govern according to the laws of nature, according to Locke, and have an obligation with the people known as a “social contract”.  A political society allows the laws of nature to be enforced in an evenhanded and unbiased way toward all people, and protect the people’s freedom. 

Although people obviously forfeit some of their freedoms in the pursuit of a lawful society, Locke considers this sacrifice absolutely necessary for the common good, as he claims that people are not granted the right to do as they please by nature.  Political societies limit the personal freedoms of its constituents but at the same time protect their rights.  Locke draws an undeniable distinction between freedom and rights.  In the state of nature, one may be free to kill, but in doing so, gives up the “God given right” to live.  Thus in order to protect these rights, one must forfeit some freedoms.  However, Locke does insist that these sacrifices must only be given for the sake of one’s most important rights, and more specifically according to the laws of nature.  Stated simply, Locke understands that the state of nature provides men with unlimited freedom, but the innate dangers in this freedom cause people to gravitate toward organized society, a place where their most sacred rights are protected in exchange for freedoms.

            Locke discusses the sacrifice of rights and the transition of humanity from the state of nature to organized political society.  However, all political philosophies must have exceptions in order for them to make sense, and Locke’s second treatise is no different.  Locke goes on to observe the different criteria for political revolution in a society.  While the people undoubtedly must give up many of their freedoms in order to produce a stable society, the government that they produce also holds a certain set of responsibilities to its people.  This is part of Locke’s social contract that the people enter into with their government.  According to Locke, when a government is created, it is solely responsible for enforcing natural law upon its citizens, and nothing more.  The institution of laws that violate this principle, are illogical, or simply tyrannical are wholly condemned in Locke’s political philosophy.

 Locke claims that if the government of the people fails to uphold its responsibilities of the social contact, it is entirely appropriate for the people to remove its power and set up a government that adheres more strictly to the concept of natural law.  The people have the right to dissolve any government that completely fails to uphold their interests and the interests of nature.  The social contract plays a very important part in Locke’s political ideals, and is the entire basis for the idea of revolution in government.  While philosophers like Thomas Hobbes argued that the state of nature, anarchy, was simply a hypothetical situation, Locke argues that this state of nature exists in any government that institutes tyrannical laws and that when a government begins to revert to the chaotic state of nature, the people retain the right to exercise the social contract and dissolve the government. 

Although Locke’s social contract heavily influenced the constitution, it remains entirely unclear what the grounds for violation of natural law are, so that it would be very difficult to accuse a government of failing to uphold them.  Locke’s works have been applied to several revolutions, including the American and French revolutions, in which the people asserted that it was in their best interest to institute a new government.  The social contact, while entirely subjective, has worked as a justification for revolution throughout history, and remains a staple of many democratic constitutions even today.

John Locke was a brilliant political philosopher that was centuries ahead of his time in his theories on government.  In his second treatise he outlines many conditions for a functional and proper government that will serve the best interests of humanity.  Locke’s second treatise exclusively deals with the state of nature and the laws of nature.  He details the anarchic tendencies of the state of nature and explains why it is not sufficient to provide all humans with their unalienable rights.  Locke further explains why humans tend to gravitate toward a governmental system and away from the state of nature.  Although natural state provides men with unlimited freedom and equality, and deprives them of their rights because there can be no legitimate repercussions for violating natural law.  Thus people enter into a social contract with their leaders, sacrificing some of their freedoms for their rights. 

This leads Locke to his final conclusion on the nature of government. When people enter into a social contract with their government and agree to sacrifice their rights, their government enters into a certain level of responsibility to its people as well.  If the government fails to uphold the interests of its people, or it begins legislating in a way that regresses back to natural law, the people retain the right to remove their collective power from the government and set up a new one in its place. Though many consider Locke’s works to be synonymous with Democracy, his ideals could be applied to a functional monarchy as well, or even a benevolent dictatorship. 

As long as a government can effectively maintain its social contact and is chosen by the majority of the people, Locke’s philosophy leaves much of the varieties of government available for usage. Locke’s political philosophy can be applied to everything from the American Revolution to democracy abroad, and everything in between.  Locke succeeds in placing every revolution in history within the context of his social contract principle, and in doing so; he brings to light the very nature of humanity.