Consent in the political theory of John Locke

Author(s):  
James Moore

This chapter focuses upon natural rights in the writings of Hugo Grotius, the Levellers and John Locke and the manner in which their understanding of rights was informed by distinctive Protestant theologies: by Arminianism or the theology of the Remonstrant Church and by Socinianism. The chapter argues that their theological principles and the natural rights theories that followed from those principles were in conflict with the theology of Calvin and the theologians of the Reformed church. The political theory that marks the distinctive contribution of Calvin and the Reformed to political theory was the idea of popular sovereignty, an idea revived in the eighteenth century, in the political writings of Jean-Jacques Rousseau.


2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 307-322 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cara Nine

Do territorial rights include the right to exclude? This claim is often assumed to be true in territorial rights theory. And if this claim is justified, a state may have a prima facie right to unilaterally exclude aliens from state territory. But is this claim justifiable? I examine the version of territorial rights that has the most compelling story to support the right to exclude: territorial rights as a kind of property right, where ‘territory’ refers to the public and common spaces included in the domain of state jurisdiction. I analyse the work of A. J. Simmons, who develops the political theory of John Locke into one of the most well-articulated and defended theories of territorial rights as a kind of property right. My main argument is that Simmons’ justification for rights of exclusion, which are derived from individual rights of self-government, does not apply to many kinds of public spaces. An upshot of this analysis is that most Lockean-based theories of territorial rights will have a hard time justifying the right to exclude as a prima facie right held by states against aliens.


Author(s):  
Hugh Breakey

C. B. Macpherson’s 1962 The Political Theory of Possessive Individualism: Hobbes to Locke challenged the canonical interpretation of seventeenth-century English political theorists by exploring their allegiance to “possessive individualism,” the idea that man’s normative essence consists in his self-ownership. After surveying the work’s impact, this chapter analyzes Macpherson’s concept of possessive individualism and considers the inter-relations amongst its economic, ontological, and psychological postulates. The chapter argues that—while Macpherson’s exegesis erred in trying to graft the concept onto early modern political theorists like John Locke—his core idea remains significant today. Possessive individualism accurately describes an influential normative perspective increasingly pervading and facilitated by contemporary global capitalism, as exemplified in the global financial crisis of 2007–09.


1977 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 205-214 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alfred G. Killilea

Although the political dimensions of the attempt to deny death in our culture have been largely neglected, this denial is positively required by the assumptions and incentives of our political ideology. An examination of the political theory of John Locke, the philosopher who has had the largest impact upon American institutions and ideology, reveals how central to his thought were assumptions about the lure of unlimited acquisition, the inevitability of human estrangement and the significance of achievement. All three of these assumptions survive today encased in Locke's widely accepted doctrine on property and all three are undermined by the movement to treat death more openly and humanly. In particular, the recognition of the limits of human existence allows for a perspective on life's activities that threatens the Lockean inspired politics of growth for the sake of growth. The force of this collision reveals both the contemporary prevalence of Locke's ideas and the potential for significant political repercussions in the insights gained from facing death.


Author(s):  
Henrique Carvalho

This chapter builds on the discussion initiated in the previous chapter, contrasting the political theory of Thomas Hobbes with that of John Locke in order to argue that the same insecurity found in Hobbes’s account of criminal law and punishment is preserved in Locke’s model of society. It provides a rarely seen analysis of Locke’s account of crime and punishment, as well as the role which these concepts play in his broader political theory. This theoretical examination is used as an analogy through which to understand the tensions and contradictions found in the liberal model of criminal law, as well as its vulnerability to conditions of socio-political insecurity.


2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Claus Offe

The “will of the (national) people” is the ubiquitously invoked reference unit of populist politics. The essay tries to demystify the notion that such will can be conceived of as a unique and unified substance deriving from collective ethnic identity. Arguably, all political theory is concerned with arguing for ways by which citizens can make e pluribus unum—for example, by coming to agree on procedures and institutions by which conflicts of interest and ideas can be settled according to standards of fairness. It is argued that populists in their political rhetoric and practice typically try to circumvent the burden of such argument and proof. Instead, they appeal to the notion of some preexisting existential unity of the people’s will, which they can redeem only through practices of repression and exclusion.


Author(s):  
Sara Brill

Aristotle on the Concept of Shared Life studies Aristotle’s understanding of the political character of human intimacy via an examination of the zoological frame informing his political theory. It argues that the concept of shared life, i.e. the forms of intimacy that arise from the possession of logos and the capacity for choice, is central to human political partnership, and serves to locate that life within the broader context of living beings as such, where it emerges as an intensification of animal sociality. As such it challenges a long-standing approach to the role of the animal in Aristotle’s thought, and to the recent reception of Aristotle’s thinking about the political valence of life and living beings.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document