John Locke example essay topic

When one begins to examine the current hodgepodge of political governmental theories shaping the globe today, words such as "democracy,"communism", and "totalitarianism" emerge as dominant forces. Upon further inquiry, each system comprises a specific ideology concerning the relation of the governors to the governed people, however, it is only in democracy that one finds a true partnership between these two parties, thanks in large part to the work of the eighteenth century Enlightenment philosopher, John Locke. Before the era of Locke, the "age of reason" (encompassing the opinion that human beings are considered rational creatures capable of employing reason and logic in order to solve pressing questions of the time), around the time of the English Glorious Revolution (1689), "democracy" encompassed a much different scope than most use it today in the common vernacular. Its etymology can trace back to the days of the Republic of Ancient Rome and the rule of the Senate, one of the first true "governments of the people, for the people, and by the people" as President Abraham Lincoln phrased within his Gettysburg Address. Democracy's correlation with the formulation of American political philosophy, however, would demand a solid foundation of purely epistemological, Lockian conjecture, earning John Locke designation as a "Father of a truly American system of government".

The United States would incorporate some of Locke's most radical views into the construction of its most prized political documents (the Constitution and Declaration of Independence), which in subsequent years, would prove a model for democracies the world over. Long before the founders of the United States of America assembled in Philadelphia to sign the Declaration of Independence on July 4, 1776, committing their energies to the establishment of a purely democratic government, citizens of the Ancient Roman Empire embraced democratic principles in the organization of their Republic. Such ideals as the "rule of the majority", and "the development of man's potentiality to govern himself" remained unheard of before Rome sent its legions outside of Italy to conquer the known world. Although Roman culture assimilated many practices of the Hellenistic civilization before it, including its deities, it would abstain from a crippling vision of man at the mercy of a vengeful god or goddess who determined his fate. Such a shift in paradigm allowed Roman society to contemplate the contribution each individual could make toward the administration of the entire community, however, in essence, true power lingered within the hands of the patricians (Roman societal elite), those men groomed for political life. In light of such an elitist attitude, elections comprised a formality, as the Senate morphed into an oligarchy.

Administration by the few for the many became a standard facet of government throughout the next few thousand years, leading toward the rise of the monarchy and the institution of the principle of divine right. The glimmer of hope that was the Roman Republic thus gave way to a lust for concentrations of power through the Middle Ages (Catholic rule by the Pope and his appointed kings) and into the Renaissance during the fourteenth through sixteenth centuries. The emergence of humanism as a doctrine separate from that of man's doom of eternal religious damnation coincided with a sense of freedom and control over one's own destiny, both spiritually and materially. The evolution of government soon followed suit moving from the serfdom's of the Dark Ages to a more council, committee oriented methodology of dealing with communal issues. The King's Council (in England) took on the new name of the House of Lords (a Romanesque elitist body of nobles), which was subsequently augmented by the House of Commons, the first true organization of individuals lacking upper class pageantry with authority to enact change for its fellow citizens. Although England began to recognize the worth of the individual apart from his breeding, it retained the view of human nature as proposed by Thomas Hobbes, that man required authoritative discipline to forego his "brutish state of nature" existence.

Government, although covering a wider spectrum of representation, continued to treat man as an entity to be tamed, rather than a thoughtful member of an advanced society. At this precise moment in the evolution of modern government, a man emerged on the scene to challenge Hobbesian philosophy with a radically new approach, placing a human's unique ability to reason above all, allowing him to control his destiny and create a governmental system that augmented this rationale through a reinterpretation of natural law. John Locke, by employing among all things, optimism to the human condition, proceeded to impart a freedom upon man to form societies grounded in mutual respect for one another's labor. Such an attitude truly distinguished him from the common thoughts of the day, for under a Hobbesian paradigm, monarchies, and even tyrannies could find foundation, however, there existed no such leeway within Locke.

The proposal of the "social contract" within his Second Treatise of Government, published anonymously in 1689-1690, opened a door into the next stage of government on a global scale, for England stood on the precipice of conflict with its newly established colonies in the New World. The men chosen to lead the young nation found solace within Locke's writing as it validated the distaste growing in their mouth for their ruler 300 miles across the ocean. England's treatment of its colonies violated almost every prong of the Second Treatise's outline of societal establishment. King and Parliament had essentially invested none of their own labor into the mercantile venture, yet reaped most of, if not all the benefits. The Lockian view of natural law dictated that no one had the right to govern anyone else's body without the willing consent and approval of the individual, which occurs in the form of suffrage. This notion further presupposes that all humans are created equal and independent, which forbids any exercise of violence over another person's "life, health, liberty, or possessions".

The colonists, however, remained severed from the deliberation of the very government, which controlled their existences. After the employment of various diplomatic measures, those in power refused to heed the cry of "No taxation without representation". Such actions implored the colonists to seek other means of reparation. Once a government fails to protect, or, worse yet, harms, the citizens' property, that government "dissolves" its right to legitimately rule the people, giving right to the collective to establish a new government. If John Locke had never burst upon the scene, America's founding parents would have gazed upon a political motif offering no hope for salvation, for Hobbes frowned upon all attempts to overthrow one's government, for such an uproar would throw man back into the undesirable state of nature. Locke can afford to allow a changing of a society's governmental authority for man's natural state lies in his freedom to employ his labor in the acquisition of property.

Government essentially exists out of convenience to maintain that freedom, drawing man into a "social contract" in which mutual respect for another's exertion formulates an administration to enhance, rather than hinder, man's innate inclinations. As long as humankind maintains a sense of that freedom in society, peace will prevail among them. America's founders must have breathed a sigh of relief, as they looked upon the landscape of their new homes with a copy of the Second Treatise in their hip pocket. Monarchies, in their blatant denial of the potential of all men to participate in governmental activities, posed a serious threat to any sense of freedom in the Lockian sense, as power flowed from the position and the utilization of force, rather than compromise.

The principles of Ancient Rome within their democratic experiment began to reemerge, as Washington, Madison, Jefferson, and others fought for their, according to Locke, inherent right of recognition of their God-bestowed faculty of reason. All members of society (except Atheists), having freely invested their labor in the attainment of property, possessed a "divine right" to interject their thoughts into the management of their government. Although these ideals seem almost elementary to the modern ear, the colonists met with untold opposition in this struggle for "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness", (changed from "property" within the Second Treatise). As the years began to go by, however, the United States of America would continually fall back upon their underpinning of purely Lockian standards, in its dealings with the globe as a whole. The very word "America" has become synonymous with "freedom,"liberty", and "justice", for no other reason than its adoption of the philosophy of John Locke, for this nation struggles against wrongs in the world, which tend to deny those basic values to people outside its borders. Other governmental structures seek to dominate their citizens through force or inheritance, denying their societies the chance to embrace their independence as beings capable of disciplining themselves to live together in harmony (Locke) without threat of the exercise of their base desires (Hobbes).

Regimes rise and fall due to their rejection of what Locke found so simple and straightforward: the beauty within an individual's effort to develop the potentiality naturally within him to contribute meaningfully to the establishment of a structured society that provides the maximum quality of life to all involved. The very essence of the American ideal, which compels people all over the Earth to seek refuge within her borders, owes its complete identity to the liberating paradigm of John Locke. No longer would a person look toward some outside authority, be it a monarch, a dictator, or even the Bible and the Church, for his direction and guidance. The true thrust of the Enlightenment, the importance placed upon the self, shone through within Locke's pieces not only in print, but also in practice in the newly formed United States government.

The entire theme of the twentieth century, "humanity's liberation from the forces which seek to confine his natural freedom", drips of Lockian thought and grows on Lockian perspectives. The philosopher states that governments need to break away from rule by "absolute, arbitrary power" and switch to democratic governments, or rule by the majority. America as a new nation embraced this call to emancipation as it shrugged off the yoke of a greedy concentration of power, which ultimately caused the great empire of Ancient Rome to fall. Although one by any means cannot claim that democracy is indeed the "perfect" governmental structure, it has proven itself a viable force in the journey toward arriving at a compromise through which all people possess the equality to pursue their goals without tyranny or hindrance. Government's purpose lies in its fulfillment of the objectives of its people in accordance with reason, rather than an oppressive domination of their instinctive gravitation toward autonomy. Without Locke's radical contributions, "America" as an ideal, as a conviction, as a state of being, would have failed to even materialize.