How do john lockes ideas about government compare with those of jean jaques Rousseau?

Answer 1

Montesquieu believed that the type of government, whether monarchy or republic, most depended upon the type of country and that factors like population, religion, economic conditions, traditions, and climate played a role in the suitability of a certain type of political institution. In the case of a monarchy, the government needed to be limited by various other establishments and the rights of the citizens needed to be protected from arbitrary decision-making. He completely opposed the oppressive and inefficient absolutism of France at the time. He developed the division of power, constitutional limits on the ruler, and a separate legislature for the formulation of laws while still protecting the political power of the aristocracy. As part of his model for an ideal government, Montesquieu used Great Britain with its parliament, king, and court system. He believed that executive, legislative, and judicial power was separated among these bodies and that they could have some control over each other. This perception was flawed however, since Montesquieu was unable to see how patronage and electoral corruption put a few powerful aristocrats in charge.

Rousseau argued that people could be insignificant and evil without the bonds of society to shape them. He believed that instead of seeking freedom by pulling away from the law, one should follow it more closely. The law itself should be created by a consensus of the people. This theory, in effect, argued that some had to be forced to be free. In addition, Rousseau condemned the selfish consumerism of European society. He also encouraged the declaration of a state religion based on deism. Rousseau's theories, which called for complete obedience to the law to obtain complete freedom, valued the society as a whole above the individual citizen. His claims that only when individualism was abandoned and society worked together was there the best outcome definitely gives us an indication of that. His insistence that a society should be controlled by a majority of the citizenry wants rather than what each person does is another. Though Rousseau opposed many of the tenets of the Enlightenment philosophy, he wasn't its enemy. It was in the environment of change and original thinking that the Enlightenment fostered that Rousseau was encouraged the think and share his theories.

Answer 2

Locke holds that we have natural rights, rights that inhere in us as human beings independently of our being members of a political community. Rousseau denies it, maintaining that all rights come from the state. This has sweeping consequences for the legitimacy of government power. Locke holds that government authority is legitimate only within certain limits; it is bounded by our natural rights, which we construct governments to preserve. Since Rousseau recognizes no such rights, he recognizes no such bounds. For him, government may exercise authority over anything to promote the common good. That doesn't mean we have no rights; we have the rights the government allots to us, and no others.

Answer 3

Rousseau and Locke differ slightly on how the question of sovereignty should be addressed. Rousseau believed that men would essentially destroy themselves due to their "mode of existence and therefore must enter into a government that controls them. Unlike Rousseau, Locke believed firmly in the fact that government should be split up into a legislative branch and a ruling branch, with the legislative branch being appointed as representatives of the people. He contends that people give up the power of their own rule to enter into a more powerful organization that protects life, liberties, property, and fortunes.