The Misunderstanding of Lockean Political Philosophy in the American Founding Era
Abstract
It has become a historical inertia that the public and academia deem Lock as the foundation of American politics. However, Locke never explicitly supports the separation of power. Unlike Modern Liberalism, there is no clear-cut definition identifying the boundary between the legislative and executive power. It is a common mistake to interpret the Declaration of Independence as originating from Lockean Liberalism. In reality, Lockean political philosophy and DOI bifurcate at several points within the Second Treatise: executive power and legislative power can be owned by the same person; the exercise of executive power can exceed the limits of the legislatures. Besides, the question of the origin of the executive power remains unsolved. This essay will point out these mysteries and academic misunderstandings by explaining that the Law of Nature is the foundational thought of The Second Treatise. This essay will also delineate conflicts in The Second Treatise but argue that the divine intention is the resolution to all the self-contradictions. This divine intention is set up by both normative and historical threads.
References
- “Declaration of Independence: A Transcription.” National Archives and Records Administration, National Archives and Records Administration, www.archives.gov/founding-docs/declaration-transcript. Accessed 25 Sept. 2023.
- Jayne, Allen. “Locke and the Declaration.” Jefferson’s Declaration of Independence: Origins, Philosophy, and Theology, 1st ed., University Press of Kentucky, 1998, pp. 41–61. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt130jgjm.7. Accessed 26 June 2023.
- Arcenas, Claire Rydell. America’s Philosopher: John Locke in American Intellectual Life. The University of Chicago, 2022.
- Locke, John. Locke: Two Treatises of Government. Edited by Peter Laslett, Cambridge University Press, 1988.
- Dunn, John. The Political Thought of John Locke: An Historical Account of the Argument of the ‘Two Treatises of Government’. Cambridge University Press, 1969.
- Ward, Lee. “Locke on Executive Power and Liberal Constitutionalism.” Canadian Journal of Political Science / Revue Canadienne de Science Politique, vol. 38, no. 3, 2005, pp. 719–44. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/25165850. Accessed 30 Oct. 2023.
- Waldron, Jeremy. “Separation of Powers in Thought and Practice.” Boston College Law Review, vol. 54, no. 2, 2013, pp. 433-468. HeinOnline.
- Kelly, Kristin A. “Private Family, Private Individual: John Locke’s Distinction Between Paternal and Political Power.” Social Theory & Practice, vol. 28, no. 3, July 2002, pp. 361–80. EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx? direct=true&db=a9h&AN=7581177&site=ehost-live&scope=site.
- Kleinerman, Benjamin A. “Can the Prince Really Be Tamed? Executive Prerogative, Popular Apathy, and the Constitutional Frame in Locke’s ‘Second Treatise.’” The American Political Science Review, vol. 101, no. 2, 2007, pp. 209–22. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/27644441. Accessed 30 Oct. 2023.
- von Leyden, W. “John Locke and Natural Law.” Philosophy, vol. 31, no. 116, 1956, pp. 23–35. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/3749204. Accessed 30 Oct. 2023.