Related question:
v ‘’A
tyrant lacks authority and legitimacy. He is to be seen as a rebel’’. Evaluate
this assertion against the background of John Locke’s thesis of fiduciary
relationship and trust between a leader and his subjects.
(YOUR
INTRODUCTION)
WHAT MAKES
POLITICAL AUTHORITY LEGITIMATE
Specifically
stated, according to Locke, it is the express consent of a people within a
state that gives legitimacy and validity to political authority. This can be
seen in his idea of the social contract whereby the people who felt a potential
threat to their naturally acquired property within the state, had to give their
political and legal freedom partially over to a power that could help to
enforce laws to oversee the protection of state property by citizens. Every
member of society possesses an express consent which he has an obligation to
willingly give over to a leader, for the collective good of all. It is this
express consent that makes a man a full and responsible member of society, and
when the people collectively hand it over, it automatically makes political
authority legitimate.
IMPORTANCE OF
TRUST AND FIDUCIARY ELEMENT IN POLITICAL OFFICE
Fiduciary,
simply implies having a trustee relationship in any endeavor. Regarding
political office, Locke stresses the importance of involving the trust element
as well as the structure of fiduciary. As a result of this fiduciary structure,
the ruler automatically and obligatorily has the responsibility to respect the
trust that the ruled has bestowed on him. In other words, every ruler, within
the provision of a fiduciary structure, must be accountable and responsible in
carrying out his or her political duties.
THE PLACEMENT OF
A RULER IN THE SCHEME OF THINGS
Understanding
the reason behind the need for a ruler to oversee the state according to Locke
will help to monitor the level of responsibility of a ruler. In other words, we
must know why we really need a government in the state. Locke emphatically
traces this need for a ruler to the provision of nature for the general good of
man. The earth belongs to God and is a gift to man by God. Man is thus expected
to exploit and enjoy the resources therein. He does this by bringing in his
labour, for labour is the tool of the labourer (man). So, once man mixes his
labour with any material object, the final output is what he automatically has
a legitimate claim to. Thus, the existence and claim to private property is
anchored on this natural process. Accordingly, Locke reasons that it is God and
not a sovereign who had given men a title to the fruits of their labour. Since
this is the case, it becomes the role of the rulers of the states to create a
suitable environment where these properties would be secured.
THE CONSEQUENCE
OF RULERS BETRAYING FIDUCIARY AND TRUST
Having
established the role of a ruler in the scheme of things, it becomes inevitable
that whenever there is a breach of contract (social contract), the ruler may be
overthrown. This holds because, once a ruler this political trust, he has
subjected himself to a position of war against his subjects; and the resistance
he should expect is not to be any less than that given to an unjust aggressor.
For the fact that each citizen has willingly given over his or her express
consent for a successful rule, expecting a particular service in return, it is
only right that any ruler who breaks this agreement should be done away with as
fast as possible (delete am fast !!!). Hence, a revolution becomes very
necessary in order to remove the potential threat which the citizens have
concerning their life and property especially.
BALANCING AND
JUSTIFYING REVOLUTION
Considering
the fact that the political environment as described by Locke is a society
contained by man who is a rational being and not an aggressive being, Locke
emphasizes a balance in the ideology of revolution. A ruler has every right to
rule and to use his political power for public good. However, all men also have
the right to resist the ruler of a legitimate political society only where such
a ruler manifests abuses of power and the fiduciary agreement. So, what can
justify revolution and resistance by the citizens is when there is a real and
clear threat to the estates, liberties and lives of the majority. Aside this,
to rebel against the government is unjust and unethical.
TYRANNY AS THE
REAL ENEMY
In
respect to the fore-going, it is necessary to specifically state that tyrannous
governments are the real political enemies. Hence, there is adequate justifiable
ground to resist tyranny. Also, doing this does not imply a disturbance of the
government or an aggressive act, but it represents the just and ethical thing
to do. This follows because according to the rules of fiduciary structure, a
tyrant lacks authority and legitimacy; he is to be seen as a rebel, a traitor,
a backstabber. Tyrants are like beasts and it is the political right and
responsibility of every man within the state to destroy such political
nightmare. Tyrants must be overthrown. However, Locke stresses a particular
mindset of rebellion which the subjects must have. Political rebellion or
revolution should not be an act of revenge but a move to restore and recreate a
violated political order.
(YOUR CRITICISMS
AND CONCLUSION)
No comments:
Post a Comment