19886
|
The idea that absolute power improves mankind is confuted by history [Locke]
|
|
Full Idea:
He that thinks absolute power purifies men's blood, and corrects the baseness of human nature, need but read the history of this, or any other age, to be convinced to the contrary.
|
|
From:
John Locke (Second Treatise of Government [1690], 092)
|
|
A reaction:
I can't imagine who proposed the view that Locke is attacking, but it will have been some real 17th century thinker. Attitudes to monarchy changed drastically in England, but Louis XIV was still ruling in France.
|
19903
|
Despotism is arbitrary power to kill, based neither on natural equality, nor any social contract [Locke]
|
|
Full Idea:
Despotical power is an absolute, arbitrary power one man over another, to take away his life whenever he pleases; and this is a power which neither Nature gives, for it has made no such distinction between one man and another, nor compact can convey.
|
|
From:
John Locke (Second Treatise of Government [1690], 172)
|
|
A reaction:
Colonies of seals, walruses and apes seem to display despotism, based on physical strength, though that is largely to do with mating. There could be such a compact, but Locke would regard it as invalid.
|
19904
|
Legitimate prisoners of war are subject to despotism, because that continues the state of war [Locke]
|
|
Full Idea:
Captives, taken in a just and lawful war, and such only, are subject to a despotical power, which, as it arises not from compact, so neither is it capable of any, but is the state of war continued.
|
|
From:
John Locke (Second Treatise of Government [1690], 205)
|
|
A reaction:
How long after a war finishes is such despotism legitimate? What happened to the German prisoners in Russia in 1945? Locke defined despotism as the right to kill, but that is expressly contrary to the rules of war, look you.
|
19900
|
The executive must not be the legislature, or they may exempt themselves from laws [Locke]
|
|
Full Idea:
It may be too great temptation to human frailty, apt to grasp at power, for the same persons to have the power of making laws to also have in their hands the power to execute them, whereby they may exempt themselves.
|
|
From:
John Locke (Second Treatise of Government [1690], 143)
|
|
A reaction:
The main principles of modern constitutions are devised to avoid corruption. If people were incorruptible (yeah, right) the world would presumably be run very differently, and rather more efficiently, like a good family.
|
19902
|
Any obstruction to the operation of the legislature can be removed forcibly by the people [Locke]
|
|
Full Idea:
Having erect a legislative with the power of making laws, when they are hindered by any force from what is so necessary to society, and wherein the safety and preservation of the people consists, the people have a right to remove it by force.
|
|
From:
John Locke (Second Treatise of Government [1690], 155)
|
|
A reaction:
I doubt if he was thinking of the French Revolution, but this will clearly have application to the English events of 1642. The Speaker of the Commons was held down in his chair in the 1620s, so that some legislation could be enacted.
|
19911
|
If legislators confiscate property, or enslave people, they are no longer owed obedience [Locke]
|
|
Full Idea:
Whenever the legislators endeavour to take away and destroy the property of the people, or reduce them to slavery under arbitrary power, they put themselves into a state of war with the people, who are thereupon absolved from any further obedience.
|
|
From:
John Locke (Second Treatise of Government [1690], 222)
|
|
A reaction:
This might fit Louis XVI in 1788. Locke was certainly not averse to consideration the situations in which revolution might be justified. He was trying to be even-handed about 1642. Locke seems to think that without property you ARE a slave.
|