The authors of the Virginia Declaration of Rights, the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Paine’s Common Sense and the United States Constitution pulled from many different sources during the infancy of these invaluable documents. They used pieces such as Hobbes’ Leviathan, Locke’s Second Treatise on Government, Rousseau’s Of The Social Contract, and Montesquieu’s The Spirit of the Laws as inspiration for America’s fundamental government. Each of these influential political philosophers were instrumental in making our government what it is today. Hobbes brought the ideas of natural equality, a strong, powerful government, and the principle that governments must be able to protect the people to American political philosophy. Locke added that …show more content…
Rousseau states “ Man is born free; and everywhere he is in chains” and “A country cannot subsist well without liberty, nor liberty without virtue.” Rousseau’s impacts on American government include his position that people are what make a nation. Buildings and seats do not decide whether or not one votes, that is the role of people. What Rousseau means by bring the people into chaos is that the people must think for themselves and not just let those who are deemed more educated decide for them. As America is a Democratic Republic, the root word democracy is used, which means that the majority of the country’s wishes must be thought of and respected. He also believes that while an individual 's ideas must be recognized, they must stand down to ensure the majority 's vote is respected. This is shown in the way we vote, and the way that congress passes bills. Americans have a voice, but when the majority speaks, it is done. While the representation of the people is appreciated, the appointed representative must make sure that his ideas are in alignment with those whom he represents. When one who is placed in a position of authority over a select group of people does not respect their will, he loses his title of representative and just becomes one and of …show more content…
Montesquieu states “government should be set up so that no man need be afraid of another”. From this doctrine American Political Philosophers derived the separation of powers into the Executive, Judicial, and Legislative branches. Montesquieu’s presentation of the branches of government were adopted into American political documents upon their creation. The idea that there wasn’t one governing body, but three was unheard of. Most occupants of the new “America” came from England a country ruled by a King. Therefore making it a Monarchy where a single family is seen as divine and ordained by God to be the ruler over that country. The power is passed down generation to generation and each firstborn son is then placed in power after his father. So, the idea of having a government that does not just depend on one family, but many different persons to run it was not a common philosophy. But, the writers of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights thought that this would be a new and honorable way to run their fledgling country. So thus, the Democratic Republic of the United States was born. Designating the three branches with their own roles in society guaranteed that no one branch would have more power that the others, but it would just have different powers. The three branches are like a triangle. They balance eachother out and support each
The American ideals in regards to freedom along with other human rights are not unique to the United States. In fact many of these freedoms and other rights found within the American declaration of independence were in fact copied from the Englishmen John Locke who wrote extensively on the subject nearly a century before the declaration even came into existence. John Locke was many things throughout his life mainly a philosopher and was also heavily involved in politics and psychology. This is evident throughout Locke’s writings. One of his most renowned works is his Second Treatise of Civil Government in which he discusses his views in regard to the state of nature, why people form governments and the benefits they gain from doing so, along with analyzing the extent of parliament’s
John Locke, one of the leading philosophers of the European Enlightenment was very important when it came to political thought in the United States. His ideas of the reasons, nature, and limits of the government became especially important in the development of the Constitution. In one of his most famous writings of that time, Two Treatises on Government (1689), Locke established a theory where personal liberty could coexist with political power ; meaning that the people would agree to obey the government and in return, the government would have the responsibility of respecting the people’s natural rights. In other words, he laid out a social contract theory that provided the philosophy and source of a governing author...
Even though Locke was the most influential with his ideas, both Aristotle and Hobbes’ opinions contributed to Jefferson 's ideals in the declaration; and how the British government neglected those ideals. Aristotle believed the state is formed to reach something the individuals cannot reach alone, “all communities aim at some good, the state or political community, which is the highest of all, and which embraces all the rest, aims at good in a greater degree than any other, and at the highest good” (Aristotle, 7) known as the good
"This inquiry will naturally divide itself into three branches- the objects to be provided for by a federal government, the quantity of power necessary to the accomplishment of those objects, the persons whom that power ought to operate," writes Alexander Hamilton in the Federalist #23 in reference to the separation of powers. The basic concept here is the idea of the federal government being divided into three separate branches that would balance excessive democracy through a system of checks on each other. The three branches, respectively known as the legislature (Article I), the executive (Article II), and the judiciary (Article III), were designed to entice the opponents of the Co...
Specifically, the idea that man is endowed with certain liberties that were granted by God and/or nature was advocated by the Enlightenment thinkers. Many people took aim at arbitrary governments and the “divine right of kings.” John Locke in return offered principles of constructing a constitutional government, a contract between rulers and the ruled. In Document 7, John Locke in The Two Treatises of Government stated that men consent to enter society in order to preserve their natural rights such as life, liberty, and property. The government should protect people's natural rights and if not, then the people can remove their consent because the government derives its power from the consent of the people. John Locke wrote during the time period of the Enlightenment; therefore, his thoughts were based on the emerging idea of individualism furthermore man's inherent rights and powers. Thomas Jefferson wrote in The Declaration of Independence (Document 9) that are all men are created equal and that they are endowed with certain natural rights. The Declaration of Independence was written because of England's tyrannical rule over the American colonies thus, the citizens felt that their natural rights were being abused by the English government. Individualism was indeed formed in response to the skepticism of the Church as
The Founding Fathers of the United States relied heavily on many of the principles taught by John Locke. Many of the principles of Locke’s Second Treatise of Government may easily be discovered in the Declaration of Independence with some minor differences in wording and order. Many of the ideas of the proper role of government, as found in the Constitution of the United States, may be discovered in the study of Locke. In order to understand the foundation of the United States, it is vital that one studies Locke. A few ideas from Hume may be found but the real influence was from Locke. Rousseau, on the other hand, had none.
There are many different ways in which the Enlightenment affected the Declaration of Independence and the U.S Constitution. One way was the by the idea of a Social Contract; an agreement by which human beings are said to have abandoned the "state of nature" in order to form the society in which they now live. HOBBES, LOCKE, and J.J. ROUSSEAU each developed differing versions of the social contract, but all agreed that certain freedoms had been surrendered for society's protection and that the government has definite responsibilities to its citizens. Locke believed that governments were formed to protect the natural rights of men, and that overthrowing a government that did not protect these rights was not only a right, but also an obligation. His thoughts influenced many revolutionary pamphlets and documents, including the Virginia Constitution of 1776, and the Declaration of Independence. The Bill of Rights was created as a listing of the rights granted to citizens, the Bill of Rights serves to protect the people from a too powerful government. These civil rights granted to U.S. Citizens are included in the first 10 amendments to the U.S. Constitution. Additionally, Locke’s ideas about checks and balances and the division of church and state were later embodied in the U.S. Constitution as well. The Constitution replaced a more weakly organized system of government as outlined under the Articles of Confederation.
John Locke is considered one of the best political minds of his time. The modern conception of western democracy and government can be attributed to his writing the Second Treatise of Government. John Locke championed many political notions that both liberals and conservatives hold close to their ideologies. He argues that political power should not be concentrated to one specific branch, and that there should be multiple branches in government. In addition to, the need for the government to run by the majority of the population through choosing leaders, at a time where the popular thing was to be under the rule of a monarch. But despite all of his political idea, one thing was extremely evident in his writing. This was that he preferred limited
Things in the Middle East, Syria and Iran are in some complex situations right now, Mr. President, with the outcome of the Arab Spring and the issues the United States has with its allies and enemies. The United States needs to repair its alliances, make peace with its enemies and cautiously tread into understanding and gathering knowledge with the situation in the Middle East before declaring any actions to be taken.
...believed it kept many in bonds or slavery. While Jean-Jacques Rousseau believed that freedom was attained by entering into a social contract with limits established by good will and community participation. Both theories would put restraints on personal property and capital creating ownership relinquished to the state. He believed that laws to protect citizens could not keep up with the changing economic environment. One could conclude that Marx and Rousseau’s theories were relatively close in the role that it plays between citizens and personal property ownership.
John Locke is the most influential character in American history, thought, and practice. Without the influence of his writings, America would not have the same foundation of unalienable Rights, stable governance, and quality of life. However, Locke remains widely unknown and unstudied by the newer generations of Americans. His most influential work, the Second Treatises of Government, laid the ground, both theoretically and institutionally, for the American system of government that has been enjoyed for over two centuries. His influence on the American way of thinking is made evident when examining the text of the Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution.
...ion with the general will. This may sound like a contradiction but, to Rousseau, the only way the body politic can function is by pursuing maximum cohesion of peoples while seeking maximum individuation. For Rousseau, like Marx, the solution to servitude is, in essence, the community itself.
The term “civil or social liberties” is one that garners a lot of attention and focus from both Rousseau and Mill, although they tackle the subject from slightly different angles. Rousseau believes that the fundamental problem facing people’s capacity to leave the state of nature and enter a society in which their liberty is protected is the ability to “find a form of association that defends and protects the person and goods of each associate with all the common force, and by means of which each one, uniting with all, nevertheless obeys only himself and remains as free as before” (Rousseau 53). Man is forced to leave the state of nature because their resistance to the obstacles faced is beginning to fail (Rousseau 52). Mill does not delve as far back as Rousseau does and he begins his mission of finding a way to preserve people’s liberty in an organized society by looking to order of the ancient societies of Greece, Rome and England (Mill 5). These societies “consisted of a governing One, or a governing tribe or caste, who derived their authority from inheritance or conquest” (Mill 5). This sort of rule was viewed as necessary by the citizens but was also regarded as very dangerous by Mill as the lives of citizen’s were subject to the whims of the governing power who did not always have the best interests of everyone in mind. Mill proposes that the only time “power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others” (Mill 14) and this is one of the fundamental building blocks of Mill’s conception of liberty. Rousseau, on the other hand, places more importance on the concept of a civic liberty and duty whose virtue comes from the conformity of the particular will with the general will.
...ons on what kind of government should prevail within a society in order for it to function properly. Each dismissed the divine right theory and needed to start from a clean slate. The two authors agree that before men came to govern themselves, they all existed in a state of nature, which lacked society and structure. In addition, the two political philosophers developed differing versions of the social contract. In Hobbes’ system, the people did little more than choose who would have absolute rule over them. This is a system that can only be derived from a place where no system exists at all. It is the lesser of two evils. People under this state have no participation in the decision making process, only to obey what is decided. While not perfect, the Rousseau state allows for the people under the state to participate in the decision making process. Rousseau’s idea of government is more of a utopian idea and not really executable in the real world. Neither state, however, describes what a government or sovereign should expect from its citizens or members, but both agree on the notion that certain freedoms must be surrendered in order to improve the way of life for all humankind.
This indicates that the community will only be peaceful when the people are in the state of nature. However, this questions why a government is created if the result will only cause the government to be corrupt. He also believes that there are interest groups that will try to influence the government into supporting what they believe in. Rousseau sees that the people will only be involved in the government is they choose to participate in the voting. He also says that when the people are together as a collective, they work and are viewed differently compared to when they are as individuals. Although Rousseau does understand both Hobbes and Locke’s theories, it makes the audience wonder why he didn’t fully support the theory of leaving people in the state of nature. By doing so, it would allow the people to continue having individual freedom without causing a state of