UNIT 12 LOCKE: CONSTITUTIONALISM AND LIMITED GOVERNMENT⁎ Flashcards
Describe the nature of Locke’s social contract
Efficient Pointer Summary Using Keywords
- Legitimate Political Authority: Only consent through a social contract.
- State of Nature: Locke argues it’s possible for peaceful coexistence under natural law.
- Reason to Leave State of Nature:
Lack of settled, known law (natural law is not formalized).
No impartial judge (everyone is both judge and executor).
Lack of enforcement power (violators may escape punishment).
- Benefits of Civil Society:
Established law (legislature).
Impartial judge (judiciary).
Enforcement power (executive).
- Motivation for Social Contract: Protect natural rights (life, liberty, property).
- Introduction of Money: Leads to social inequalities, increasing need for protection.
- Loss of Liberty in Civil Society: Transformation from natural liberty (obedience to natural law) to social liberty (obedience to civil law).
- Power to Punish: In civil society, the power to punish violations lies with judges and executives, not individuals.
Mnemonic
L.S.R.B.M.L.P.
Legitimate authority
State of nature
Reason to leave
Benefits of civil society
Motivation for social contract
Loss of liberty
Power to punish
Main Answer (500 Words)
Introduction
Locke’s theory of legitimate political authority revolves around the consent of the people through a social contract.
Unlike Hobbes, who views the state of nature as chaotic and violent, Locke sees it as a condition where peaceful coexistence is possible if individuals follow natural law.
Locke’s challenge is: Why would people leave this peaceful state of nature and form a government?
Reasons to Leave the State of Nature
State of Nature Lacks Benefits of Civil Society: Locke argues that people leave the state of nature because it lacks three key elements that civil society offers:
- Lack of established, known law:
In the state of nature, natural law is not formalized into a written law, making it subject to misinterpretation and bias.
- Absence of impartial judge:
In the state of nature, every individual is both the judge and the executor of the law. This creates bias, where decisions may be driven by self-interest, passion, or revenge.
- No enforcement power:
Without a central authority, violators of natural law may escape punishment, especially if they are powerful.
A common authority can ensure that laws are executed and that justice is maintained.
Benefits of Civil Society
Three Benefits of Civil Society:
- Established, known law:
A written law recognized by all, reducing ambiguity and creating certainty in legal standards.
- Impartial judge:
A neutral authority to interpret and apply the law fairly, ensuring justice without personal bias.
- Enforcement power:
A centralized authority (the executive) has the power to implement laws and punish violators, ensuring accountability.
Locke argues that these benefits are essential for the protection of individuals’ natural rights: life, liberty, and property. Without these benefits, the state of nature could easily descend into a state of war, especially with the rise of money and increasing social inequalities.
Introduction of Money and Inequality
Money and Social Inequality:
The introduction of money allows individuals to accumulate wealth without the spoilage limitations. This can create inequality, as some people accumulate large amounts of property while others are left without.
People who have property may seek better protection for their rights, which encourages the formation of a civil society.
Transformation of Liberty
Loss of Liberty:
In the state of nature, individuals enjoy natural liberty, meaning they are free to act according to natural law.
Once entering civil society, individuals must give up certain freedoms. The natural liberty of being governed only by natural law transforms into social liberty, where individuals must obey civil laws created by a legitimate government.
These laws are made through consent, meaning individuals retain their freedom through their participation in the social contract.
Power to Punish
Punishment in Civil Society:
In the state of nature, individuals have the right to punish violations of natural law themselves.
However, in civil society, this right is transferred to judges and executive authorities. This ensures that punishment is not arbitrary and is carried out impartially, fostering a more just society.
Conclusion
Locke’s theory argues that legitimate political authority is formed through the consent of individuals entering into a social contract.
The deficiencies of the state of nature, including the lack of established law, an impartial judge, and an enforcement power, motivate individuals to form a civil society.
This civil society protects natural rights more effectively and transforms natural liberty into social liberty.
Ultimately, social contract theory leads to a more secure and just society where authority rests on consent.
Explain Locke’s views on limited government
12.3 Constitutional Limited Government
12.3.1 Role of Consent
12.3.2 Right to Dissent
Efficient Pointer Summary (Keywords):
- Motivation for Commonwealth
- Social Contract
- Majority Consent
- Legislative Power
- Form of Government
- Elected Legislative Body
- Limitations on Legislative Power
- Executive Power
- Prerogative Powers
- Separation of Powers
- Consent (Tacit & Express)
- Right to Dissent/Rebellion
Mnemonics:
Most Smart Minds Love Finding Exciting Logical Laws, Exploring Power Systems Carefully Really.
Motivation, Social Contract, Majority Consent,
Legislative Power, Form of Government,
Elected Legislative Body, Limitations,
Executive Power, Prerogative Powers,
Separation of Powers, Consent, Right to Dissent.
Main 500-word Answer:
Introduction
Locke’s framework for legitimate government is grounded in a social contract that ensures the protection of natural rights and the maintenance of a balanced power structure. The commonwealth, established through consent, is structured around legislative and executive powers, which function within defined limits to protect individual rights and prevent tyranny.
Body
Motivation for Commonwealth:
People enter into a social contract to escape the state of nature, ensuring protection of their natural rights (life, liberty, property). The commonwealth is created for collective security and societal benefit.
Social Contract:
Locke asserts that a legitimate government arises from consent, where individuals agree to form a commonwealth to protect their rights. The commonwealth must function on the principle of majority consent, acknowledging that while unanimous consent is ideal, it is not always practical.
Majority Consent:
A key feature of Locke’s theory is the principle of majority rule. Individuals, once entering the social contract, are bound to submit to the will of the majority in governmental decisions. Majority consent legitimizes the creation and modification of government structures.
Legislative Power:
Legislative power is the supreme authority in Locke’s vision. It determines the form of government, which can range from a democracy to an oligarchy or monarchy. The legislative body enacts laws based on natural law, and its main role is to serve the common good while respecting individual rights.
Form of Government:
Once the commonwealth is formed, the majority decides on the structure of government. Whether a democracy, oligarchy, or monarchy, the key factor is that the legislative body operates within its limitations.
Elected Legislative Body:
Locke prefers a representative legislature that is elected by the people, as this ensures that the government remains responsive to the needs and desires of the populace.
Limitations on Legislative Power:
Legislative power must operate within the constraints of natural law, and it must ensure equality and fairness in its laws. The legislature cannot act against the common good or increase taxes without proper consent from the people.
Executive Power:
The executive power enforces laws and maintains order. It is tasked with ensuring the laws passed by the legislature are carried out efficiently. In Locke’s system, the executive includes both enforcement and judicial functions, combining both the executive and judicial powers.
Prerogative Powers:
The executive is granted certain prerogative powers to deal with situations not explicitly addressed by the legislature. These powers allow the executive to act in the interest of the commonwealth in emergencies or unforeseen circumstances, though they must be exercised with caution and in accordance with the social contract.
Separation of Powers:
Locke’s theory emphasizes a separation between the legislative and executive powers to prevent the concentration of authority. While the legislature enacts laws, the executive ensures their enforcement. However, the executive cannot violate laws set by the legislature unless it is for the public good in emergency situations.
Consent (Tacit & Express):
Locke recognizes two forms of consent: express and tacit. While some individuals may give explicit consent to join the commonwealth, others implicitly consent by benefiting from the government’s services (such as roads, protection, and property rights). This tacit consent is valid, even if not formally stated.
Right to Dissent/Rebellion:
If the government, whether executive or legislative, violates the terms of the social contract or acts tyrannically, Locke asserts that the people have the right to dissent and even rebel. The right to resist illegitimate authority is grounded in the need to protect natural rights. If the government fails to protect life, liberty, or property, the people can dissolve the commonwealth and return to the state of nature.
Conclusion
Locke’s political philosophy revolves around the principles of consent, separation of powers, and the protection of natural rights. Through the social contract, individuals agree to form a commonwealth that is limited by the consent of the governed. The balance of power between the legislative and executive bodies ensures that government authority remains legitimate and aligned with the common good. In cases where the government exceeds its bounds, the people have the right to resist and reclaim their sovereignty.
Examine Locke’s perspective on the
ROLE OF CONSENT
Efficient Pointer Summary (Keywords):
- Role of Consent
- Exit from State of Nature
- Political Society (Commonwealth)
- Express Consent
- Tacit Consent
- Obligations Based on Consent
- Problems with Express Consent
- Tacit Consent Explanation
- Benefiting from Government
- Obligation to Obey Laws
Mnemonic:
Really Efficient People Express Consent Through Open Belief To Benefit.
Role of Consent, Exit from State of Nature, Political Society
Express Consent, Consent Forms, Tacit Consent
Obligations Based on Consent, Benefiting from Government, Tacit Consent Explanation
Benefiting from Government, Obligation to Obey Laws
Main Answer:
Introduction
In Locke’s constitutional framework, consent plays a pivotal role in the legitimacy of government. It is through individual consent that people exit the state of nature and form a political society, the commonwealth. Locke’s theory highlights both express and tacit consent as valid means through which individuals participate in a political society and abide by its laws.
Body
Role of Consent:
Consent is the foundation for the legitimacy of government in Locke’s philosophy. It is by consenting that individuals leave the state of nature and join a political society (commonwealth).
Locke stresses that, apart from the universal obligations of natural law, all other obligations must be grounded in individual consent. Without consent, any political authority would lack legitimacy.
Exit from State of Nature:
In Locke’s view, individuals are in a state of nature where they are free but insecure. By consenting to form a commonwealth, they transition to a political society, where protection of their natural rights (life, liberty, property) is ensured.
Political Society (Commonwealth):
A political society is a structured commonwealth, formed based on mutual consent. This society exists to safeguard individual natural rights and ensure social order. Its legitimacy hinges on the consent of its members.
Express Consent:
Locke argues that one becomes a full member of a political society through express consent. This is a direct, voluntary act of agreeing to join the commonwealth.
While express consent is ideal for entering a society, Locke acknowledges its practical limitations, as few people have explicitly consented to the government they live under.
Tacit Consent:
To address the practical issues with express consent, Locke introduces the concept of tacit consent.
By living within the boundaries of a commonwealth and benefiting from its protections and services (e.g., roads, laws, property rights), an individual is deemed to give tacit consent to the governance of that society.
This form of consent is indirect and not explicitly stated, yet Locke argues it carries the same legitimacy as express consent.
Obligations Based on Consent:
Once consent is given (whether express or tacit), individuals are bound by the laws and governance of the commonwealth.
Those who enjoy the benefits of living within a political society are obligated to follow the laws of that society as part of their agreement to consent.
Problems with Express Consent:
A significant challenge in Locke’s theory is the rarity of express consent. Most people have not actively consented to their governments, and the issue arises whether their implicit acceptance through tacit consent suffices for legitimacy.
Locke contends that tacit consent, given the practical constraints of express consent, is still valid and sufficient for individuals to be considered subject to the government’s authority.
Tacit Consent Explanation:
Locke provides a broader explanation of tacit consent by stating that any individual who benefits from the commonwealth’s governance (through property rights, infrastructure, or safety) is inherently consenting to abide by its laws.
The scope of tacit consent extends to anyone within the territory of the government, regardless of whether they have formally agreed to its formation or laws.
Benefiting from Government:
For Locke, benefiting from government institutions (e.g., public roads, protection of property) is tantamount to consenting to the governance itself.
This tacit consent is reflected in the practical reality of living in and using the commonwealth’s services, and it makes citizens obligated to follow the established laws.
Obligation to Obey Laws:
The core obligation of individuals who give either express or tacit consent is to obey the laws that govern them. Locke emphasizes that, by accepting the benefits of the commonwealth, one is morally and legally obligated to comply with its laws and decisions, as they are derived from collective consent.
Conclusion
In Locke’s theory, consent is the linchpin of political legitimacy. Through either express or tacit consent, individuals enter into the commonwealth, creating a social contract that binds them to the laws of the land. Despite the difficulties of obtaining express consent from every individual, Locke’s theory allows for tacit consent, where participation and benefit from government services imply agreement to its authority. This ensures that the commonwealth remains legitimate as long as it protects natural rights and operates within the bounds of consent.
Examine Locke’s perspective on the right to dissent
Efficient Pointer Summary (Keywords):
- Legitimate Political Power
- Consent through Social Contract
- Tyrannical Power
- Exceeding Limits
- Right to Dissent
- State of War
- Protection of Natural Rights
- Dissolution of Commonwealth
- Violation of Social Contract
- Right to Resist or Execute
Mnemonic:
Legitimate Consent, Tyranny Exceeds, Right To Dissent, State of War, Protection, Dissolution, Violation, Resist.
Legitimate Power, Consent, Tyranny, Exceeding Limits
Right to Dissent, State of War, Protection of Rights
Dissolution, Violation of Contract, Right to Resist
Main Answer:
Introduction
In Locke’s political theory, the legitimacy of government hinges on the consent of the governed, granted through a social contract. This contract exists to protect individuals’ natural rights, including life, liberty, and property. However, when a government or ruler becomes tyrannical by exceeding its lawful limits or violating the terms of the social contract, Locke asserts that the people retain the right to dissent, rebel, and even dissolve the commonwealth.
Body
Legitimate Political Power:
Locke, unlike Hobbes, believes that legitimate political power is based on the consent of the people, given through a social contract.
This consent establishes a government to protect individuals’ natural rights, ensuring life, liberty, and property are safeguarded.
Consent through Social Contract:
The social contract is an agreement between individuals and the government where individuals consent to obey laws in exchange for protection.
The role of the government is to serve the common good and protect natural rights within the limits of the social contract.
Tyrannical Power:
Tyranny occurs when the government, whether through the executive or legislative body, exceeds its lawful authority or neglects its duties.
A despot exercising absolute control over life and property without regard for natural law or rights becomes a tyrannical ruler.
Exceeding Limits:
When any branch of government exceeds its legitimate authority, it risks becoming a tool of oppression.
Locke argues that such overreach undermines the trust placed in government by the people, violating the principles of the social contract.
Right to Dissent:
Locke strongly defends the right to dissent when a government oversteps its bounds.
If the government fails to protect natural rights or violates the social contract, people are justified in resisting its authority.
State of War:
Locke explains that when a government uses force without right or exceeds its powers, it places itself in a state of war with its people.
In this state, all prior ties and obligations between the people and government are nullified, and individuals regain their right to resist.
Protection of Natural Rights:
The primary purpose of the commonwealth is the protection of natural rights.
If the government fails in this function, there is no reason for people to continue obeying its laws, as their natural rights would be better preserved in the state of nature.
Dissolution of Commonwealth:
Locke asserts that the people can dissolve the commonwealth if the government becomes tyrannical.
The social contract is contingent on the government’s adherence to the protection of natural rights; if violated, the people have the right to break the contract.
Violation of Social Contract:
When the government acts against the terms of the social contract, Locke contends that the people are justified in judging its actions.
This judgment can lead to the people rejecting or overthrowing the government, as it no longer serves their interests.
Right to Resist or Execute:
Locke goes further by asserting that people may even have the right to resist or execute those in power who transgress the limits of legitimate government.
This right stems from the belief that if the government becomes a force of oppression, it forfeits its legitimacy, and the people must act to protect their rights.
Conclusion
In Locke’s framework, political power is legitimate only when it serves to protect the natural rights of individuals. When the government becomes tyrannical by exceeding its lawful powers, Locke affirms that people have the right to dissent, rebel, and even dissolve the commonwealth. The right to resist tyrannical power is central to Locke’s theory, ensuring that the people remain sovereign and that the social contract is a mutual agreement based on the protection of natural rights.
Evaluate the legacy of Locke’s constitutionalism and limited government
Efficient Pointer Summary (Keywords):
- Locke’s Constitutional Legacy
- Influence on Constitutions
- Criticisms of Tacit Consent
- Simmons’ Criticism
- Dunn’s View
- Pitkin’s Interpretation
- Criticism of Property Emphasis
- Macpherson’s Critique
- Locke’s Sovereignty Ambiguity
- Natural Law as Sovereign
- Multiple Levels of Authority
- Natural Rights and Limited Government
Mnemonic:
Locke’s Constitutional Legacy, Influenced Constitutions, Tacit Consent, Simmons, Dunn, Pitkin
Criticism: Property, Macpherson, Sovereignty Ambiguity, Natural Law, Multiple Levels.
Legacy, Constitutional Influence, Tacit Consent
Criticism (Simmons, Dunn, Pitkin), Property, Macpherson
Sovereignty, Ambiguity, Natural Law, Limited Government, Multiple Levels of Authority.
Main Answer:
Introduction
Locke’s constitutional ideas have profoundly influenced modern political systems, especially regarding limited government and the protection of natural rights. However, his ideas, particularly his theory of consent and property rights, have sparked considerable debate and criticism.
Body
Locke’s Constitutional Legacy and Influence:
Locke’s ideas on constitutional government, particularly the idea of a government with limited powers, have inspired many modern constitutions. His thoughts laid the foundation for liberal political philosophy, emphasizing individual rights and consent as core principles of legitimate governance.
Criticisms of Tacit Consent:
One of the most contentious aspects of Locke’s philosophy is his theory of tacit consent, where individuals give consent to a government simply by enjoying its benefits. Critics argue that this dilutes the very essence of consent in Locke’s theory.
Simmons (1992) claims that tacit consent, as Locke defines it, allows people to give consent without their awareness, which undermines the concept of legitimate consent itself.
Dunn (1969) offers a different view, arguing that Locke’s notion of consent is a lack of unwillingness, rather than active agreement, suggesting that continuing to live in the commonwealth implies consent.
Pitkin (1965) challenges the centrality of consent, proposing that Locke’s primary concern was natural law, not consent. For Pitkin, a commonwealth’s legitimacy hinges more on its adherence to natural law than on the explicit consent of its members.
Criticism of Property Rights:
Locke has been criticized, especially by scholars with socialist leanings, for placing too much emphasis on property rights as the foundation of political obligation.
Macpherson (1962) argues that Locke’s theory effectively limits full participation in the commonwealth to those with property. Locke’s suggestion that tax contributions determine political representation further supports this critique, as wealthier individuals would have more political influence.
Locke, however, defends property as a natural right, arguing that even the legislative body cannot infringe upon it without consent. He views property as intertwined with life and liberty, and maintains that the government must protect all natural rights, not just property.
Nonetheless, it’s acknowledged that Locke’s theory may disproportionately favor the propertied class, since they have more resources to protect.
Locke’s Sovereignty and Ambiguity:
Locke’s conception of sovereignty has been seen as unclear and contradictory.
He assigns supreme authority to the legislative body but also places limits on its power, leading to an ambiguity in the structure of sovereignty. True sovereignty, some argue, cannot be constrained by rules.
Unlike Hobbes, who advocates for an indivisible, absolute sovereign, Locke’s sovereignty is rooted in natural law, and this law is the ultimate authority in Locke’s system.
Locke’s framework envisions multiple levels of authority: individuals, the community, the legislature, and the executive, with checks and balances preventing any one body from gaining too much power.
Natural Law as Sovereign:
Locke’s sovereignty is rooted not in a human institution but in natural law. He views natural law, as inspired by divine will or reason, as the ultimate source of authority. This sets Locke apart from Hobbes, whose theory centers on a human sovereign with absolute power.
Conclusion
Locke’s theory of constitutionalism has had a lasting impact on the development of liberal democracies, promoting limited government and the protection of natural rights. While his theories on tacit consent and property rights have faced criticism, and his conception of sovereignty remains somewhat ambiguous, Locke’s commitment to natural law as the highest authority and his belief in multiple levels of governance remain significant contributions to political philosophy.
