Does the state command the resources in its надра? Does the state command oil? No, the state commands only the people; it may punish them if resources are misused.
The state has no bound on its bottom. It can go through the core of the earth if it so chooses; not individuals, though.
John Locke wrote his political philosophy in the 1680s, right after the Exclusion Crisis.
The exclusion crisis was the question who would succeed Charles II. The issue was that James II (who was supposed to succeed him) was a catholic.
But he did in fact assume the throne. The exclusion crisis was the question of whether or not he could become king.
Locke sides with the Whigs (Shaftesbury) against the Tories. Locke also had to flee to continental Europe after the Exclusion Crisis, Holland (the Netherlands), specifically, to write his treatise on government. Published it towards the end of the 1680s.
Locke was trying to justify the revolution (to come in 1688). The Glorious Revolution happened and dethroned James II and thus gave the crown to Mary II.
Locke believes there is a right to revolution (in certain circumstances). According to him, the government has to do certain things for its citizens, and if it doesn’t we can fire them. This is the key difference with Hobbes.
Hobbes ← political absolutism
Locke ← the right of the king to rule has to respect the laws of nature
Locke goes against Descartes with the Essay Concerning Human Understanding. He proposes the tabula rasa approach. We start with a blank page and we fill the page with empirical input.
This essay was quite popular during the French Revolution, including his views on language.
“Is green central to an apple?”
The Letter Concerning Toleration is a smaller work by Locke which is also quite famous; it’s also quite modern for the time, he argues for a separation between state and church. Limited government to a certain extent. We should not coerce people to endorse the right god. People who are coerced to believe will not really believe. Locke very explicitly tolerates Jews. Two groups are not included in the toleration, however: atheists and Catholics.
Catholics can’t be tolerated because they have another sovereign - the Pope. We don’t want Catholics because they’re a security risk. They’d be fine if they didn’t let the Pope meddle with state affairs.
He says that an atheist can’t really be trusted.
The works above are ones we don’t care about that much.
We care about the Two Treatises of Government. A lot of people don’t care about the 1st because it’s a discussion he has with Filmer. The latter’s like a religious Hobbes.
So, we focus on the 2nd treatise. Many contemporary theorists read Locke like the first (proto)liberal.
He’s against political absolutism because he defends natural rights. (The purpose of gov. is to protect the natural rights of citizens).
Apparently James just started doing shit by royal decree whenever parliament tried to block him. This was seen by Locke as arbitrary rule.
Locke LOVES property rights.
Locke has the view that God gave the world to humans collectively.
This is a very religious doctrine. The first liberal builds liberalism on religious grounds.
People posses natural rights based on humanity rather than belonging to some state.
Liberty is the basis and state power is only justified to protect liberty.
Hobbes says that the absolutism of a sovereign is grounded in consent.
The state is not a little family where there is one appointee that rules the whole thing.
Already there are two parents; kids stop listening to their parents at some point; kids can be taken away from their parents; the idea that Adam’s lineage and inheritance is what gives someone rule is absurd (according to Locke).
How does Locke get to individual property rights from shared property of the world by children of God?
How can people be subjected to rule if it’s all up to consent. Can’t the oppressed just say no? ← question a Filmer fan might ask
Locke says Men are here for a certain purpose given to us by God. This implies we have duties towards God. We are here as a result of God’s creation, and God’s will prevails. We have duties; a duty to self-preservation, […]
In Locke, in the state of nature, one must still respect another’s rights based on God’s laws. One has a duty not to harm themselves or to harm others.
Locke did not believe innate ideas.
Natural Law is deducible.
There is a definite right and wrong in the state of nature, so both would need to come to what God would have wanted.
However, here, one is always inclined to interpret the law of nature to their own advantage.
Some laws of nature are not clear.
Labor theory of value is how you go from common property to individual property.