Aksel Baaran, 21400008

ABSOLUTISM AND JOHN LOCKE

In the history of Europe, 17th and the beginning of 18th century is called
the age of absolutism. Absolutism was the age which monarchs were in the
peak of their power. Monarchy, coming from the Latin mono, meaning one, and
absolute, meaning only, meant absolute and full power. Kings believed they had
the divine right and their position was given by God. There were many
different ideas and responses to Absolutism. We must keep in mind that the age
of Enlightenment came right after, which really shows us how people really felt
towards the matter. Looking from todays view, one cannot agree with the idea
of being ruled with an absolute monarchy, for it has always caused a rebellion
and is a violation of personal rights. To understand why this matter had different
responses, we should look at the different thinkers of the time.
Different great thinkers had different opinions, and this can be explained
with their personal outlook and experiences. I will try to analyze John Lockes
Second Treatise of Government, which was published around 1689, (around a
year after the Glorious Revolution) for it was so influential that the American
Declaration of Independence had ideas from it. Locke lived from 1634 to 1702
and wrote many essays on political philosophy and theory. He was a man of
reason and ration, and his ideas were a foundation for the Age of
Enlightenment. His most influential concept in philosophy is maybe the tabula
rasa, which suggests that people are born empty, with nothing- neither
knowledge nor faults. Around 1689-1690, he published anonymously second
treatise of government. I will also refer many times to Hobbes, his fellow
Englishman who lived shortly before him, for he had an almost opposite take on
the subject with his Leviathan (1651).
Before understanding why Locke wrote his Treatise and why it is so
different from Hobbes, we must first look at the times in general, for it was a
series of events that led them to create their works. England at the time was
ruled by Charles I, who believed in the Divine right, and did not want to be
questioned, yet people believed there should be a limit to Royal rights and

parliament should have more power. Conflicts between the parliament and the
king started to grow, parliament had gathered an army, and war broke out. After
9 years of battle, parliament won and executed Charles. This is interesting to
note, although the monarchy was abolished, England

still went being ruled under the personal rule of Oliver Cromwell, leader of the
parliament. After 11 years in 1660 people wanted the monarchy back, for this
reason, the English civil war was not a revolution. This led to Restoration,
which the parliament called Charles II, son of Charles I, back from France to be
the king, in which he had to agree to give parliament more power. He suddenly
died in 1685, and because he had no children, his brother James became the
king. There was only one problem with James II; he was a catholic. He was alien
to both parties of the parliament, which were protestant. He wanted policies like
the toleration of different religious beliefs. Parliament did not like this and in
1688 called William the Orange, the Dutch prince and husband of James
daughter Mary, to become the king and queen, who were nicely protestant.
Although William came with an army, James army was scared and fled. James
himself also got scared and fled as well hence the other name of the
revolution, Bloodless Revolution, for no blood was spilled. This settled England
as Protestant and put an end to many conflicts between the parliament and
monarchy.
We should first come back Hobbes, who was born in 1588. He was a man
who lived through the civil war, and he was a man who was full of fear. A man
full of fear in a civil war. He fled to France, partly because he was afraid that he
would be persecuted of being a Royalist. He believed that in the most basic
Human Nature there would be war, and someone should control the people to
prevent it from happening, thus he supported the monarchy. His Leviathan,
published two years after the execution of the king, was controversial for this
reason. His only experience without a king was the civil war, on the other hand,
Locke was only ten years old when the war broke out and was not affected as
much as Hobbes was. He was not even in England at the time of the Glorious
Revolution. His friend, the Earl of Shaftsbury was a leader in the planning of the

revolution, and this influenced Locke by shaping his ideas and most likely
making him pro-revolution. Second treatise justifies the resistance, and it is a
defense of William and the civil government. A civil government which protects
the freedom, property and rights of people. When looked at today, people say it
is already how it is supposed to be, yet it is important to note that this was
completely new, making it a revolutionary work. Just by looking at it generally
we can see why; These ideas of freedom, equality and government became a
foundation for the modern democracy, and later on for American Declaration of
Independence and French Revolution. Thomas Jefferson even said that he was
one of the three greatest men ever lived. Later the French philosopher
Montesquieu

developed his ideas about separation of governments powers based on Lockes

philosophies. We can see that Locke was a quick influence on the world, yet
interestingly enough Locke remained anonymous until he wrote that he was the
author in his will. The reasons for this are not clear, but it can be assumed that
it was for the case if James II reclaimed his throne.
So why did Locke put pen to paper in the first place? First of all it is
interesting that the English historian Peter Laslett in the 20th century claimed
that Locke actually wrote the both treatise in 1679, and even revised it until
1683. This allegation does not change in the fact it is justifying the revolution, it
also makes it a call for a revolution. We know that his first treatise was actually
written in response to Robert Filmers Patriarcha, which supported the divine
right of kings. Locke dismissed this by saying Filmer believes that every man is
born naturally slaves to chosen kings. Yet the second and more famous one was
kind of a political proposal to worlds more modern countries like England, a
solution for the upheavals.
What were some of the ideas by Locke? After he summarizes his ideas
from the first treatise, he goes on to discuss political power. He believes it is the
power of making law, and a law is for the protecting and regulating property. He
believes that they are for the public good. Like Hobbes, he believes there is a

covenant between people and the ruler, yet difference comes when he believes
that people have a right to bring down the ruler if he fails to protect.
He goes on and proposes something that is the basis for Human Rights,
that everyone is equal and free, that people can do whatever they want as the
laws of nature allow them. This is a very significant idea, saying no men is
obligatory to the law of other men, instead they should protect each other in the
name of equality. He also suggests that when someone harms another
concerning health and property in any way, harmed one has the right of
punishment. Yet he also believes that punishments should be according to the
crime. This is where the law is needed, for a harmed man may not always make
the right decision.
He then continues into the state of war. Hobbes believes that when
humans left in nature will fight each other, Locke separates these nature and
war as two different states. First he defines war, as a state of enmity and
destruction (Wootton 1993, p.269) He suggests two different

concepts of war, the war in society, and the war in nature. The key difference is
how they end. In society, it ends when it ends with last damage, and parties in
war go to a common authority, however in nature it ends when the attacking
party stops the attack, and must also offer reparation. It is important to note
that Locke uses the term war for the fight between people, not countries.
Without an authority, people would have to defend themselves. Yet the same
thing applies to authorities, they must not fail to protect the people. This is a
difference of Locke, both from Sir Robert Filmer and Hobbes. In Patriarcha, Filmer
defends that people have no right to stand up against the king because of the
divine right. Hobbes, the pessimistic English believes that a ruler must keep
everyone in line, yet Locke believes people are more rational, believing
everyone is equal, they should be able to stand up to the ruler.

Another idea presented by Locke, which is maybe the most important, is

about property. He quotes the bible, God made the world to Adam has given
the earth the children of men (Wootton 1993, p.273) He gives this quote to
make his point about how men can benefit from the nature and earth belongs to
us all. The significance of this idea comes with the individual property,
suggesting that man can possess something when he puts the labor for getting
something. He gives an example of picking an apple; it belongs to whom it is
picked by. Yet he doesnt leave the things so simple, and says that one should
not just take as many as they want, there should be a limit drawn by needs,
such in taking too many apples will make them rot and will be a waste. He then
applies this to land, by saying when a man builds on the land, he owns the land.
He complicates the things a bit more by adding money; he views it as
something that represents worth. One can buy apples and one can make
someone pick apples for them with money, mixing his own labor as a form of
exchange.
After discussing ideas about equality of people, he then takes these ideas
into his new proposed government. First of all he believes the law should be
commonly established. The body of the government should be known and
should give judgments, and most importantly if they fail, they should be
replaced. His ideas about the property soon become his center of the
government. He even thinks that people form societies so they can have and
reserve property.

Lockes ideas seem simple yet they may take some time to fully absorb.
He repeats himself a lot, giving many, many examples on one idea. Although it
is unusual for Locke to quote the bible, he does this a lot in his most
fundamental idea of property. Most of the examples about land come from the
bible, and about how the earth was created for mankind. One cannot help but
think about this in our modern world with our knowledge about science and new
ideas of religion, can we still make sense in Lockes ideas? The earth, like in the

bible, may not have been created for humans alone, yet humans are still a part
of the world, with many other creatures. The ego of humans led them to believe
that they own it. Some got out of control and tried to rule it by themselves, yet
no absolutist survived, every man becomes dust, and that is perhaps the one
true equality. One also agrees with him on the state of war, that people do not
have to fight, unlike Hobbes. Every animal has an instinct of passing on genes
and race. Of course, these are again facts that we know in our modern world.
We may not be able to support Lockes ideas with his own reasoning of the
bible, but we can still back him up with our knowledge of human emotions,
nature, and instincts. One agrees or not, it is simply wrong to say his ideas were
less than revolutionary.
All in all, we can see that absolutism had different opinions, because of
anything else that has different opinions; different people of different ages,
characters, and views. One cannot help but wonder if Lockes ideas are maybe
too utopic in a way. When one reads the arguments, they make incredible sense
and seem understandable. It is great that it influenced many things, yet the
question is if they were kept. His ideas seem incredible for the common people,
and it is very easy for the rulers to exploit it and deceive people. Who's to say
there no governments now which hide behind the mask of democracy, a
concept which Locke laid the foundation 350 years ago?

References
-Britpolitics.co.uk,. (2015). Causes of the English Civil war. Retrieved 28 June 2015, from
http://www.britpolitics.co.uk/causes-of-the-civil-war
-D., J. (2015). Locke versus Hobbes. Jim.com. Retrieved 28 June 2015, from
http://jim.com/hobbes.htm
-Encyclopedia.kids.net.au,. (2015). Kids.Net.Au - Encyclopedia > Glorious Revolution. Retrieved 28
June 2015, from http://encyclopedia.kids.net.au/page/gl/Glorious_Revolution
-Kids.britannica.com,. (2015). Glorious Revolution -- Kids Encyclopedia | Children's Homework
Help | Kids Online Dictionary | Britannica. Retrieved 28 June 2015, from
http://kids.britannica.com/elementary/article-353186/Glorious-Revolution
-Locke, J., & Wootton, D. (1993). Political writings. New York, N.Y.: Mentor.
-Mirza, O. (2011). Why did John Locke Write (Wrote) Two Treatises of Government?. Write a Writing.
Retrieved 28 June 2015, from http://www.writeawriting.com/write/john-locke-write-two-treatises-ofgovernment/
-Osbourne, K., & Wang, B. (2015). Second Treatise of Government Study Guide. Gradesaver.com.
Retrieved 28 June 2015, from http://www.gradesaver.com/second-treatise-of-government
-Sites.google.com,. (2015). How Did John Locke Change the World? - locke and hobbes. Retrieved
28 June 2015, from https://sites.google.com/site/lockevshobbeswhowillwin/home/who-was-john-locke/johnlockes-ideas
- SparkNotes Editors. (n.d.). SparkNote on Leviathan. Retrieved June 9, 2015, from
http://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/leviathan/
- SparkNotes Editors. (n.d.). SparkNote on Locke's Second Treatise on Civil Government. Retrieved June 9,
2015, from http://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/locke/
- SparkNotes Editors. (2005). SparkNote on John Locke (16341704). Retrieved June 9, 2015, from
http://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/johnlocke/
-Theriault, S. (2009). John Locke and the Second Treatise on Government. Student Pulse, 1(10).
Retrieved from http://www.studentpulse.com/articles/6/john-locke-and-the-second-treatise-on-government
-Uzgalis, W. (2015). John Locke > The Influence of John Locke's Works (Stanford Encyclopedia of
Philosophy). Plato.stanford.edu. Retrieved 28 June 2015, from
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/locke/influence.html