John Locke’s theory of government is founded on the concept of a social contract, an idea he developed as a principal exponent of enlightenment thinking. In his Two Treatises of Government, Locke proposed that political society and government are not natural or divinely ordained but are instead human creations, formed through a voluntary agreement by individuals to secure their fundamental rights (Locke, 1689/1988). This essay will explain Locke’s theory of how government is formed through this contract. It will then explain two central assumptions which justify the agreement between the people and the sovereign. Finally, it will examine Locke’s justification for rebellion when the terms of this social contract are broken by the government.
The Social Contract and the State of Nature
Locke’s theory starts from the concept of man in a state of nature, a condition that exists prior to organised government. Unlike the chaotic view of Thomas Hobbes, Locke’s state of nature is a pre-political rather than a pre-moral state, governed by the law of nature. This law, knowable through reason, teaches that all individuals are equal and independent and have natural rights, principally the rights to life, liberty, and property (Locke, 1689/1988). However, the state of nature has certain "inconveniences." Firstly, there is no established, known law to act as a common standard. Secondly, there is no impartial judge or arbiter to settle disputes. Thirdly, there is often no power to support and execute a just sentence (Gough, 1973). These deficiencies make the enjoyment of property and other rights insecure. To escape these inconveniences, free individuals mutually agree to unite into a community, forming a social contract. They consent to give up their individual power to punish offences against the law of nature, transferring it to the community or a government established by it. The primary purpose of this government, or sovereign, is therefore the preservation of the property and rights of its citizens.
Assumptions Justifying the Social Contract
The relevance of people and a sovereign entering into a social contract rests on two main assumptions within Locke’s theory. The first assumption is the existence of inalienable natural rights. Locke held that rights to life, liberty, and property are not created by government but pre-exist it as part of the natural law. Government is not the source of these rights but is established as a device to protect them more effectively than individuals could on their own. This assumption justifies the contract because it gives people a compelling reason to create a sovereign power; they are not surrendering their freedom entirely but are exchanging a portion of their natural powers for the greater security of their fundamental rights.
The second key assumption is that legitimate government must be founded upon the consent of the governed. As all individuals are born free and equal in the state of nature, no person can be subjected to the political power of another without their own consent (Locke, 1689/1988). This consent is what gives the government its legitimacy. Locke distinguished between express consent, given by those who explicitly join a commonwealth, and tacit consent, which is given by anyone who enjoys the protection or benefits of a government's territory. This assumption is crucial because it makes the social contract a voluntary and rational act, grounding political obligation in the will of the people rather than in force or tradition.
The Dissolution of Government and Rebellion
Locke’s theory provides evidence that people can resort to rebellion if the social contract is broken. He argued that the relationship between the people and the government they create is one of trust. The community entrusts the legislature and executive with power to be used for the public good, specifically the protection of their rights. If the government violates this trust, it effectively dissolves itself and forfeits its authority. Locke described this as a state of war between the government and the people (Locke, 1689/1988). Acts that constitute such a breach of trust include the sovereign attempting to seize the people’s property, imposing arbitrary rule, or handing the people over to a foreign power. In these circumstances, power reverts to the people, who are then at liberty to resist the now-tyrannical authority and to establish a new government. This right to revolution is not a right to create disorder but is a final safeguard against tyranny, ensuring that sovereign power remains ultimately accountable to the citizens it was created to serve.
References
Gough, J. W. (1973). John Locke's political philosophy: Eight studies. Clarendon Press.
Locke, J. (1988). Two treatises of government (P. Laslett, Ed.). Cambridge University Press. (Original work published 1689)
