A few things to ponder ...

The idea of political emancipation that we take for granted was first worked out on the basis of Christianity, by John Locke. Europe had a devastating period of religious wars and England had a couple of revolutions and civil wars and an executed king in the 17th century (beat the French again, this time by over a 100 years).

Locke's arguments were based on Christian doctrines and the use of reason (a divine element in humans). Not surprisingly, his arguments are diametrically opposed to Islamic doctrines on the nature of religion and government. My point is that Locke's (and our) argument for political emancipation and religious tolerance could be made only in a Christian context and a peculiarly English one at that; and cannot be made in other religious contexts to this day unless they share those fundamentally Christian views of the person, of religion and government.

- posted by Soren in here:

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1300371718/75

John Locke (29 August 1632 – 28 October 1704), widely known as the Father of Liberalism, was an English philosopher and physician regarded as one of the most influential of Enlightenment thinkers. Considered one of the first of the British empiricists, following the tradition of Francis Bacon, he is equally important to social contract theory. His work had a great impact upon the development of epistemology and political philosophy. His writings influenced Voltaire and Rousseau, many Scottish Enlightenment thinkers, as well as the American revolutionaries. His contributions to classical republicanism and liberal theory are reflected in the American Declaration of Independence.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Locke


Liberalism is the belief in the importance of liberty and equal rights. Liberals espouse a wide array of views depending on their understanding of these principles, but most liberals support such fundamental ideas as constitutions, liberal democracy, free and fair elections, human rights, capitalism, free trade, and the freedom of religion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism


"... whenever the Legislators endeavour to take away, and destroy the Property of the People, or to reduce them to Slavery under Arbitrary Power, they put themselves into a state of War with the People, who are thereupon absolved from any farther Obedience, and are left to the common refuge which God hath provided for all men against force and violence. ... [Power then] devolves to the People, who have a Right to resume their original Liberty, and, by the Establishment of a new Legislative (such as they shall think fit) provide for their own Safety and Security, which is the end for which they are in Society."

- John Locke

John Locke was also pro slavery .. in fact he was a well known slave owner himself.

Soren wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2011 at 10:46am:


Hmm interesting Soren. Now read this:

Appraisals of Locke have often been tied to appraisals of liberalism in general, and also to appraisals of the United States. Detractors note that (in 1671) he was a major investor in the English slave-trade through the Royal African Company, as well as through his participation in drafting the Fundamental Constitution of the Carolinas while Shaftesbury's secretary, which established a feudal aristocracy and gave a master absolute power over his slaves. For example, Martin Cohen notes that as a secretary to the Council of Trade and Plantations (1673–4) and a member of the Board of Trade (1696–1700) Locke was, in fact, "one of just half a dozen men who created and supervised both the colonies and their iniquitous systems of servitude". Some see his statements on unenclosed property as having been intended to justify the displacement of the Native Americans. Because of his opposition to aristocracy and slavery in his major writings, he is accused of hypocrisy and racism, or of caring only for the liberty of English capitalists.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Locke

Hence the title of this topic Soren .. was Locke the Father of Liberalism or Contradiction?

I was considering the word Hypocrisy .. but thought I'd be kind for a change.

Lisa Jones wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2011 at 3:42pm:



Well, you can read the man's own words or you can read Wikis.

BTW, Locke was never a secretary of the Council of Trade and Plantation. He was the secretary of Lord Shaftesbury.

It is laughable to to say that the Board of Trade created the colonies or that it supervised them. "The board was, in fact, concerned with a wide range of issues, from the Irish wool trade and the suppression of piracy, to the governance of the colonies and the treatment of the poor in England. During these last eight years of his life, Locke was asthmatic, and he suffered so much from it that he could only bear the smoke of London during the four warmer months of the year. Locke plainly engaged in the activities of the Board out of a strong sense of patriotic duty. After his retirement from the Board of Trade in 1700, Locke remained in retirement at Oates until his death on Sunday 28 October 1704."

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/locke/#EndLocLif168


Parliament and the various Secretaries of State ran the colonies, especially after the Glorious Revolution of 1688 (which saw Locke return from exile in Holland) when power shifted finally and decisively from the king to Parliament.

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/liberty-positive-negative/

Ahh Soren my learned friend ... you have given me much homework I see. Good .. I like being challenged. Now let me read it all.

Amadd .. run along .. adults are trying to have a discussion here.

I shall return soon Soren .. if only to prove to you that I am indeed worthy of YOUR intellectual challenge lol

Lisa Jones wrote on Mar 23^rd, 2011 at 11:09am:


I wonder what Lisa's definition of 'soon' would be? Hmmmm.... 

S.hit .. you're fracking following me all over cyberspace you multi freak troll!

Frack off!