I hope this conclusion isn’t too obvious.
I was inspired by a few recent episodes of The Path to Liberty and I wanted to distill a short logical argument about State charters (like the Constitution) and their interpretations.
Full write-up here.
Today I’m putting together some thoughts about the failure of limited government, specifically what happens when an ostensibly Lockean, limited government is converted into an unlimited, Rousseauian framework. It can be hard to see exactly when this happens, but I argue that one of the most obvious signs is when various government officials begin to fight over ultimate authority, which in the Rousseauian framework is a fight over being the mouthpiece of the General Will, something that doesn’t exist in a Lockean framework.
Full show notes here.
Finally finished the first part of this summary, analysis, and critique of Locke’s Second Treatise. This part covers chapters 1 and 2, the Introduction and Locke’s explanation of the State of Nature.
It’s worth noting that Locke borrows his concept of the Law of Nature from Richard Hooker’s Of the Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity, which can be found here.
My perspective is that Locke doesn’t get enough credit for his work toward describing and understanding a limited government. Too much of Rousseau’s perversion of Locke has made its way into the philosophical zeitgeist, and has led people to believe Locke’s State of Nature is idyllic.
It is not.
In addition to summarizing and analyzing Locke’s work, I’m going to be going through the whole Treatise and pointing out where Locke’s efforts toward a limited form of government fails from a voluntaryist perspective.
This video (and others in the series) will be available on YouTube, Odysee, and BitChute.