Name. Prof. Dr. Syed Muhammad Ammar Hamdani.

Cell# 0321-4308548.

John Locke.
Political philosophy of John Locke.
The political idea of John Locke is found in his book "Civil Government”. John lock
opposed the idea of divine right of king as it was advocated by church of England. He
was also against the theory of absolute monarchy which was advocated by hobbs. Lock
became the official spokesman of glorious revolution of 1689. As hobbs talked about the
absolute monarchy. Whereas, lock upheld the views of constitutional government and
limited sovereignty. As a rationalist, all his ideas were based upon reason.

IDEA OF LOCKE ON HUMAN NATURE.

Firstly, Locke believed that man is a rational being capable of living in a society. He is
not selfish, self centered and aggressive.
Secondly, Locke believed that man is also capable of noble feelings like sympathy, love,
tenderness and charity towards his fellow human being. The first instinct of man was to
live in peace and harmony with others. On the basis of these ideas of human nature lock
drew the picture of state of nature and compared it with hobbs’s state of nature. To him,
state of nature was not state of war but state of precarious peace.
We find a fundamental difference between the ideas of lock and hobbs because of their
different historical background. Hobbs wrote his Leviathan keeping in mind the violent
civil war in England which brought instability. Lock wrote his work after the glorious
revolution of 1689 which brought about the constitutional government.

State of Nature of Lock.

The state of nature of lock was different as that of hobbs.

Firstly, People in the state of nature did not live in the state of war or constant fear. Men
were equal and free to act with in the limitation of law of the nature. they enjoy liberty,
they enjoyed natural right that is right to life, liberty and property. They governed by law
of nature in the state of nature. Law of nature demand that no person should harm other
person in his life, liberty and property.

Second, The state of nature of lock was not pre social or lawless as that of hobbs. It
was a state in which peace and reason reigned supreme.
Thirdly, The state of nature of lock was thus the state of peace, goodwill, mutual
assistance and preservation. It was a state in which every man had his rights and also
acknowledge his duties. These rights and duties were social and moral in character.
Fourthly, The state of nature of locke was pre political but not pre social. It was not a
state in which life was solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short.

Short comings in the state of nature.

Lock acknowledged that state of nature suffered certain short comings.

Firstly, Although, it was not a state of war, unfortunately peace was not secured. In other
words, there was precarious peace.
Secondly, The individual was guided by law of nature only. He was not sure of rightness
and wrongness of his action.
Thirdly, The state of nature was upset by the corruption and viciousness. It was
therefore, full of fear and continuous danger.
Fourthly, Lock observe that there were three drawback in the state of nature.
One, laws were not clear defined.
Second, there was no common authority to enforce the natural rights.
Third, there was no commonly and recognized accepted judge to settle disputes.
This mean that there was no legislature to make laws, there was no executive to
implement laws and there was no judiciary to interpret laws. Thus, three parts of
government was missing in the state of nature.
These drawbacks were responsible for people getting out of state of nature and entering
into a civil society or contract.

Conclusion.
The state of nature of lock have following important features.
It was pre political but not pre social.
Although, it was not a state of war but peace was not secured.
Although, it was state of peace, goodwill and mutual assistance yet, there was continuous
fear and danger of death.
In the state of nature there was no legislature, executive and judiciary.
This ill condition in the state of nature paved the way to a contract and make a civil
society.

The contract of Locke.

As we have already seen that the purpose of contract was to get out of the ill condition
which was full of fear and continuous danger in the state of nature. Thus, man wanted to
establish a civil society for the preservation of life, liberty and property. Lock say that
people in the state of nature wanted to avert a war which was round the corner and which
might break forth any time. According to lock, people wanted to escape from the state of
nature. For this purpose, they made a contract to enter into a civil society. This was a
social covenant or agreement. It was entered into and agreed upon by the people among
themselves. This contract was of all among all. Lock called it social contract. The social
contract put an end to the state of nature. People who entered into this contract did not
surrender all their natural rights which they enjoyed in the state of nature. They
surrendered only one aspect of their rights for example, right of interpretation(judiciary)
and enforcing(executive) law of nature. This surrender was made in order to protect the
existing rights in more effective manners. The contract was limited and for specific
purpose.

The people surrender the right to the community as a whole(Parliament) and not to one
man or to assembly of man. Lock recognized the sovereignty of the people. To him, state
existed only for the people. All these ideas are sharply different from the hobbs.

Two Contracts.

The first contract is known as social contract. Lock talks about the implication of second
contract namely a governmental contract. Society in its corporate capacity establish the
government. The government is authorized by the society to make a positive law based
upon the law of nature. The second contract was subordinate to first contract. This is
because the government had only judicial power. It should act for certain ends. Original
exercise of authority or power was limited to achieve those ends .
The second contract is not specially stated by lock. It was only implied by him. Lock say
that legislative power became a supreme power in the common wealth. This must be
based on the consent of the people. Hence, this power can be used in order to promote
peace and harmony in the society.

Lock consider the government as a trust. The law of nature can not be violated by the
government. The rules of the government are expected to be in accordance with the law
of nature. The judges must dispense justice according to standing laws.. No taxes can be
levied without the consent of people and their representative except in emergency. The
community thus, retain supreme power. The sovereign of lock thus give a limited power.
The people were given right of revolution. They can overthrow a government which does
not exist for the good of the people.However, he also make a difference between state and
government. He says that dissolution of government does not mean the dissolution of
state. Whereas, revolution should not be the act of minority. It must have a support of
large majority of the people. The state of lock was a tolerant state. This is because, he
respects the difference of opinion.

Characteristic of lock’s state.

State exists for the people.

The first and foremost characteristic of lock’s state is that it exists for people. The people
do not exist for the state. He says that end(purpose) of the government is good for the
community. State thus, becomes means to an end. It is a machine which man creates for
his own benefit.

State is founded on consent.

Lock says that true state is founded on consent. This consent can be expressed through
the representative of the people. He says that man gives tacit consent to a government by
simply living in its territory.
True state according to lock must be a constitutional state. In such a state, rule of law
prevail.

Government must be established by standing laws made by the parliament.

Lock say that no political liberty can exist, if man is the subject of the inconsistent,
uncertain, unknown arbitrary will of another man. Government must be establish by
standing laws made by the people and not by the absolute monarch. Moreover, true state
ensure the natural rights and it does not deprive any one from their natural rights i.e right
to life, right to liberty and right to property.

People have a right of revolt.

According to lock, people had a right of revolution. They can overthrow a government
which does not exist for the good of the people.However, he also make a difference
between state and government. He says that dissolution of government does not mean
the dissolution of state. Whereas, revolution should not be the act of minority. It must
have a support of large majority of the people. The state of lock was a tolerant state. This
is because, he respects the difference of opinion.

Transform selfish interest into public interest.

Lock’s state transform selfish interest into public good. Men will be trained to act in such
way as to promote public happiness. This could be done by introducing punishment or
artificial pains. State through a system of punishment may force a people to act for a
public good and public happiness.

These characteristics are necessary for any state. Lock says that there will be no civil
society, if man do not understand that end of the law is not to abolish or restrain but to
preserve and enlarge freedom. Only in such a state, the conflict of authority and freedom
can be perfectly reconciled.