John Locke's Influence on Modern Politics
John Locke is a prominent political philosopher whose ideas and ideals have greatly influenced modern politics. In his Two Treatises on Government, he argued against the idea that God created humans to be subject to a king. He pioneered and advocated the idea that people are born free and equal. According to his natural law, men’s equality and independence restrict anyone from harming another human being in life, liberty, health, or ownership. It is this freedom and justice that has formed the modern democracy where people are not subjects to monarchs as in the early days, but instead, they govern themselves through social contracts. Several philosophers such as Karl Marx and Edmund Burkes have developed their political philosophies, some of which challenge or modify Locke’s natural law. This paper discusses how Burke’s conservatism or Marx’s socialism adjusts or challenges Locke’s ethical commitments.
Locke's Views on Natural Law and Individual Rights
Locke advocates for a state of nature that has freedom, equality, and independence for all men. He champions the formation of governments out of consent that is based on social contract theory and argues that governments need to respect the rights of people. He speaks of combining natural rights and natural law. Despite the freedom that men have, they have to do whatever they wish “within the bounds of the law of nature.” According to Locke, individuals must respect the rights of other people at all time as bound by the natural law. He upholds the duty of people to recognize the lives and liberties of fellow men which he also ties with the natural law in the state of nature. Therefore, there is a coexistence of natural rights and natural law, but the later is primary as it commands people to respect the rights of others.
Karl Marx's Concept of Socialism
The concept of socialism by Karl Marx aims at creating a form of organization and production in a society whereby man can overwhelm alienation from his work, product, fellow men, nature, and himself and form a world of cohesion with his power (Marx, 36). The concept is regarded as a prevention of social love. He believed that a desalinated society would propel man into independence and be firm in his ideas or opinions. According to Marx, socialism achieves individual freedom in the nation, especially when alienation is eliminated among people. He believed that the concept would help much in protesting against lovelessness, exploitation of man, and wastage of natural resources at the expense of the majority. Socialism was meant to have the resources in society be under the control of the people and use them as a binding aspect to enhance social love and eliminate alienation of any kind.
Edmund Burke's Conservatism and Prudence
Edmund Burke argued in his claims against the French Revolutionaries that the objective of a political society is secure laws, religion, and liberties that are in possession instead of creating new laws and rules (Birzer). We can, therefore, make an assumption that the natural law and natural rights, as championed by Locke are the first considerations before any attempt to create additional ones. He considered political philosophy as a practical art of government in a civil society. He defines a politician as “the philosopher in action” who can never assume prior knowledge to attain a specific mathematical certainty as consequences of the actions he takes. Like Locke who identified natural rights and laws to govern the existence of men in society, Burke acknowledges that the actions and nature of men are under the rules of morality which are considered necessary. However, he argues that because men have a free will to obey or disobey the law of morality, and due to the varied social circumstances, there cannot be general laws. He argues that it is hard to anticipate occasions and live by rules in a general way.
Burke's Concept of Prudence and Constitutional Law
Burke argues that it is impossible to affirm anything universal on a moral and political subject. According to him, the aspect of morality is not like ideal mathematical concepts. Instead, the scope of morality is broad and deep. It allows modifications and exceptions which are not logically made but made through prudence (Burke, 76). He identifies prudence as a top virtue in politics and morality, which also directs, regulates, and standardizes the two. Prudence is his modification of Locke’s natural laws and rights because he realizes that the philosophy cannot work correctly to balance politics and morality. He maintained that competent jurisdiction relies on moral prudence. He believed that even with legitimate legislatures in place, oppressive results might occur if the rules of prudence and benignity are not followed. The concept of prudence, which refers to strict regard for circumstances, is not a mere empirical observation, but instead, it is an imperative moral consideration of events to prevent a political action from harming individuals whom a statesman may wish to serve.
Prudence in Burke's Political Philosophy
According to Burke, prudence is meant to regulate social changes which include the reform of societal abuses according to natural law principles of morality as well as constitutional norms. In this regard, prudence is considered the cardinal virtue in politics as it supplies the means to practically fulfill the principles of natural law in different circumstances of a person’s social life. He considers his prudence as part of the divine tact of God, which satisfies man’s political tact and moral temperance. Locke also acknowledges the role of God’s divinity in his concept of natural law. Therefore, Burke’s prudence is a universal, unchangeable, and eternal natural law in practice as applied in politics to every man at various moments and circumstances as guided by the constitutional sovereignty of nations. Prudence is the moral discretion that enables men to live under the moral law.
Burke's Views on Natural and Civil Rights
Burke asserts that when barriers of the law are broken for the sake of convenience including public convenience, then people lack something common between them. Rulers tend to be by the natural law and constitutional law when they abide by true moral prudence. It is from these two sets of laws that natural and civil rights of men are derived (Burke, 132). He had a belief that when a claim to individual rights conflict with moral expediency, they cease to be rights and instead yield to public expediency. According to scholars who described Burke, they identify him as a political philosopher both in theory and practice who stood very firm to his concept of prudence. He refused to be corrupted by all means and disapproved the French Revolution. He remained loyal to the opposition. He described this concept as a god of the world. Through his political prudence and the natural law, Burke used political mysticism to build concrete practicality.
Combining Ethical Principles: Locke, Burke, and Natural Law
Using the natural law as a code of ethics, Burke formed the basis of his political conservatism principle. With prudence to practically apply the natural law in civil society’s lower world, Burke reveals his sensitive regard to the differences in men and a reverence for his prejudices and local loyalties. His ability to combine the concepts of prudence and natural law defined the consistency in his political philosophy that was almost unsystematic. They enabled him to incorporate the limits of their valence to erase moral precepts and empirical facts that details, circumstances, and details that make political theories and practice even. He asserts that a statesman who never lose sight of his principles, is guided by the circumstances and makes judgments that are contrary of the prevailing exigencies, is likely to plunge his country into ruins. This is a fundamental statement in his definition of a politician as a ‘philosopher in action’.
Conclusion
As a political philosopher, Burke derived his ethical principles from Locke’s natural law. In the capacity of a politician, he made use of his beliefs about the circumstance of the past through his moral prudence. According to him, history is a preceptor of prudence which reveals the ordinary providence of God. He considered history as his second form of divinity which supplements scripture. In civil societies, moral laws alone are not sufficient to restrain men’s passions. Established institutions and legal processes, therefore, provide a much better suppress on men regardless of the political structure. To have a just social order, ethical norms are outlined and interpreted by these institutions. Burke’s views seem not only to support Locke’s theories of natural law and natural rights but also modifies them with the concepts of prudence and constitutional laws and rights to guide people in a better way.
Works Cited
Birzer, Bradley. “Edmund Burke On Constitutions & Natural Law – The Imaginative Conservative.” The Imaginative Conservative. N.p., 2017. Web. 10 Oct. 2017.
Burke, Edmund. Reflections on the Revolution in France. Oxford University Press, USA, 1999.
Marx, Karl. Karl Marx: selected writings. Oxford University Press, 2000.
