The Down Range Forum

Member Section => Politics & RKBA => Topic started by: tombogan03884 on July 10, 2009, 10:41:43 PM

Title: John Locke
Post by: tombogan03884 on July 10, 2009, 10:41:43 PM
 In answer to some of my rabidly anti Govt. posts FQ has frequently referred me to the writings of John Locke  a17th century English political philosopher
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/locke/
 . It was a bad idea on his part.    ;D
FQ, how could you possibly think I would miss the GOOD part of "The Second Treatise on Government" which says in essence that a man or govt. that attempts to take control of a mans life is in effect declaring war on him because if the Govt. or individual is able to use the man as they wish, they may also dispose of as and when they wish . One of the Founding Fathers paraphrased it as The Govt. that can give you everything can also take it away. The quote is generally taken as referring to rights and property, but in fact refers to the individuals very LIFE as well.
 Since the socialists wish to control every aspect of our lives the most obvious cure for our political ills, based on FQ's references would be to kill them as one would any other wartime foe.

Hey FQ, thanks for the reading list, I'll have to check out some of those others.   ;D
Title: Re: John Locke
Post by: runstowin on July 10, 2009, 11:02:02 PM
Natural Rights
Locke wrote and developed the philosophy that there was no legitimate government under the divine right of kings theory. The Divine Right of Kings theory, as it was called, asserted that God chose some people to rule on earth in his will. Therefore, whatever the monarch decided was the will of God. When you criticized the ruler, you were in effect challenging God. This was a very powerful philosophy for the existing ruler. But, Locke did not believe in that and wrote his theory to challenge it.
Perhaps the part of Locke's writing which most influenced the founding fathers of the United States Constitution was the idea that the power to govern was obtained from the permission of the people.
He thought that the purpose of government was to protect the natural rights of its citizens. He said that natural rights were life, liberty and property, and that all people automatically earned these simply by being born. When a government did not protect those rights, the citizen had the right and maybe even the obligation of overthrowing the government.

If these ideas seem familiar to you, it is because they were incorporated into the Declaration of Independence by Thomas Jefferson. Once they took root in North America, the philosophy was adopted in other places as justification for revolution.

John Locke was a true liberal, before the left bastardized the word.

http://www.let.rug.nl/~usa/B/locke/locke.htm
Title: Re: John Locke
Post by: Texas_Bryan on July 10, 2009, 11:10:29 PM
Its too bad that Thomas Hobbs now tries to run this country and control the people.  How the word 'liberal' has now been perverted to its modern political meaning is beyond me.  The idiots hardly understand that they are everything a true classical liberal hates. >:(
Title: Re: John Locke
Post by: tombogan03884 on July 10, 2009, 11:14:44 PM
Land rights was another issue he addressed, one of the major grievances of the  "rabble" was that they would go into the wilderness clear fields, dig wells, build homes, raise crops, then be told by some land speculator from the coastal cities that it wasn't their land, they had to move or pay rent.  Locke maintained that the settler earned title to the land by paying for it with his sweat and labor. In the decade prior to the Revolution there were outbreaks of violence over this in most of the Colonies. Oddly enough, those several of those remembered fondly as "Founding Fathers", such as Jefferson, Washington, and Franklin, were members of the guilty establishment rather than the aggrieved masses.
Title: Re: John Locke
Post by: fightingquaker13 on July 11, 2009, 01:22:32 AM
Glad you liked it. I figured you'd get the idea that Locke didn't mess around with those who violated his rights. Just because one prefers to do things like a gentleman doesn't mean there isn't plan B. ;D
FQ13
Title: Re: John Locke
Post by: tombogan03884 on July 11, 2009, 11:34:30 AM
Glad you liked it. I figured you'd get the idea that Locke didn't mess around with those who violated his rights. Just because one prefers to do things like a gentleman doesn't mean there isn't plan B. ;D
FQ13

Thing is, I'm not a gentleman, I don't play one on TV and I've NEVER stayed at a Holiday Inn.  ;D
Title: Re: John Locke
Post by: PegLeg45 on July 11, 2009, 12:24:48 PM
Thing is, I'm not a gentleman, I don't play one on TV and I've NEVER stayed at a Holiday Inn.  ;D

And we wouldn't have it any other way. 








 ;D
Title: Re: John Locke
Post by: tombogan03884 on July 11, 2009, 01:13:46 PM
Its too bad that Thomas Hobbs now tries to run this country and control the people.  How the word 'liberal' has now been perverted to its modern political meaning is beyond me.  The idiots hardly understand that they are everything a true classical liberal hates. >:(

Same way they stole the words "Peoples", "Democratic","Republic", "Popular","progressive", and "Gay" (which now means light in the loafers instead of cheerful. )
Look at N. Korea, the official name is "Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea"    ::)
Title: Re: John Locke
Post by: tt11758 on July 11, 2009, 02:24:29 PM
Same way they stole the words "Peoples", "Democratic","Republic", "Popular","progressive", and "Gay" (which now means light in the loafers instead of cheerful. )
Look at N. Korea, the official name is "Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea"    ::)


And the People's Republik of Kalifornia.    ;D
Title: Re: John Locke
Post by: ericire12 on July 11, 2009, 02:35:03 PM
(http://smileyx.com/smilies/fighting0061.gif)