Abstract
This introductory text focuses on the development and core ideas of Locke’s political philosophy and outlines a few relevant, current controversies among Locke scholars. After an introduction to Locke’s writings on tolerance and their development over time, I shift to his theory of justice as presented in Two Treatises of Government. Of particular importance in the latter work are Locke’s defense of a so-called “voluntarist understanding” of political legitimacy and the right to revolution, which centrally involves the claim that political power originally belongs to each individual (the individual’s natural executive right). To justify this claim, Locke provides us with a theory of laws of nature and individual rights, where he emphasizes private property, which is why special priority is given to understanding these aspects of his theory and contemporary developments of them.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
For Locke ’s involvement with various aspects of English colonialism, see Arneil , Barbara (1996) John Locke and America: The Defense of English Colonialism. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
- 2.
Locke, John (1979) An Essay Concerning Human Understanding. Oxford: Oxford University Press. For a work that focuses on the relation between Locke ’s political philosophy and his main theoretical work, see Grant , Ruth W. (1991) John Locke’s Liberalism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- 3.
For more thorough descriptions of Locke ’s life, see, for example, Ashcraft , Richard (1986) Revolutionary Politics and Locke’s Two Treatises of Government. Princeton: Princeton University Press; Laslett , Peter (1988) “Introduction” and “Addendum to Introduction,” in John Locke’s Two Treatises of Government, ed. P. Laslett . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 1–133; Marshall , John (2006) John Locke, Toleration, and Early Enlightenment Culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; Woolhouse , Roger S. (2007) John Locke: A Biography. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. I refer to Locke’s Two Treatises of Government in this chapter with the abbreviation “TT,” I use “I” and “II” to signal which treatise I refer to, and a simple number to indicate which paragraph in the text I cite. I have used John Locke’s Political Essays. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997 for “An Essay on Toleration,” and The Political Writings of John Locke, ed. by D. Wootton . Signet, 1993, for “A Letter Concerning Toleration.” I have used Peter Laslett ’s 1988 edition of Locke’s Two Treatises of Government.
- 4.
For an introduction to the contrast between Locke ’s libertarianism and other historical libertarian conceptions, see Vallentyne , Peter & Steiner , Hillel (2007) The Origins of Left-Libertarianism: An Anthology of Historical Writings. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
- 5.
For Locke , whether one interprets the Bible or uses one’s reason, if done well one will end up at the same conclusions regarding justice. After all, the Bible is supposed to capture God’s will and God created human beings along with their rationality. There is no good reason, therefore, to think that the two are ultimately in conflict.
- 6.
Filmer , Robert (1991) Patriarcha and Other Writings, red. Johann P. Sommerville (ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- 7.
For two works that are especially useful with regard to the religious aspects of Locke’s works, see Dunn , John (1969) The Political Thought of John Locke. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, and Waldron , Jeremy (2002) God, Locke, and Equality: Christian Foundations of Locke’s Political Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- 8.
Hobbes , Thomas (1994) Leviathan. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company.
- 9.
A strong voluntarist conception of political obligations maintains, as we have seen, that the legitimacy of the state depends on each subject’s actual (explicit or implicit/tacit) consent. In contrast, according to a weak voluntarist conception of political obligations, only hypothetical consent is necessary for legitimacy. For two excellent discussions of various forms of consent-based accounts of political obligations, see Onora O’Neill ’s “Kant and the Social Contract Tradition,” in Kant’s Political Theory: Interpretations and Applications, ed. Elizabeth Ellis . University Park, Pennsylvania: The Pennsylvania State University Press, 2012, pp. 25–41, and A. John Simmons ’ “Justification and Legitimacy,” in Justification and Legitimacy: Essays on Rights and Obligations. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2001.
- 10.
For a critical discussion of the presumption that the notion of a “natural resource” is unproblematic, see my “Lockean Freedom and the Proviso’s Appeal to Scientific Knowledge,” Social Theory and Practice, 2010, 36(1), pp. 1–20.
- 11.
Nozick , Robert (1974) Anarchy, State, and Utopia. New York: Basic Books.
- 12.
Macpherson , C. B. (1962) The Political Theory of Possessive Individualism: Hobbes to Locke . Oxford: Clarendon Press.
- 13.
Simmons , A. John (1992) The Lockean Theory of Rights. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
- 14.
Sreenivasan , Gopal (1995) The Limits of Lockean Rights in Property. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- 15.
Cohen , G. A. (1995) Self-Ownership, Freedom, and Equality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- 16.
Tully , James (1980) A Discourse on Property, John Locke and His Adversaries. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- 17.
Otsuka , Michael (2003) Libertarianism without Inequality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- 18.
For an argument that none of these proposed solutions to the problem that the issue poses to the Lockean theory work, see Varden , Helga (2012) “The Lockean ‘Enough-and-as-Good’ Proviso—an Internal Critique,” Journal of Moral Philosophy 9, pp. 410–422.
- 19.
For a critical engagement with the waste restriction, see Varden , Helga (2006) “Locke’s Waste Restriction and His Strong Voluntarism,” Locke Studies 6, pp. 127–141.
- 20.
Locke distinguishes between two types of actual consent, namely “explicit” and “implicit” or “tacit” consent. Explicit consent involves clearly stating “yes, I agree” in response to a question posed (here the question of entering civil society), whereas implicit or tacit consent typically involves expressing one’s agreement by doing nothing rather than something in certain situations. The argument concerning implicit or tacit consent is important for Locke ’s account of political obligations in existing states. For a good introduction into this aspect of Locke ’s theory, see Simmons (1981) Moral Principles and Political Obligations. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
- 21.
See, for example, Simmons (1981) and his On The Edge of Anarchy: Locke, Consent, and the Limits of Society. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993.
- 22.
For an exploration of feminist interpretations of Locke, see: Hirschmann , Nancy J. & McClure , Kirstie Morna (eds) (2007) Feminist Interpretations of John Locke. University Park, PA: Penn State University Press. For a good introduction to some of the related debates in the libertarian tradition, see Vallentyne , Peter & Steiner , Hillel (2001) Left-Libertarianism and Its Critics: The Contemporary Debate. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
- 23.
Pogge , Thomas (2008) World Poverty and Human Rights. 2nd ed., Malden: Polity Press.
Acknowledgement
Thanks to Ingrid Albrecht , Catherine Champniers, Grace Frank, Tone Monkerud , and Jørgen Pedersen for invaluable help with the presentation of ideas in this chapter.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Varden, H. (2015). John Locke – Libertarian Anarchism. In: Fløistad, G. (eds) Philosophy of Justice. Contemporary Philosophy: A New Survey, vol 12. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9175-5_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9175-5_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-017-9174-8
Online ISBN: 978-94-017-9175-5
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPhilosophy and Religion (R0)