Rousseau differs with Locke with respect to the dry land of nature and its relation to liberty. Whereas Locke believes that the state of nature is the source of accomplished society and the qualities of that society (liberty and equality, in terms of the ideal society), Rousseau believes that courtly society and its qualities are imposed by convention. Locke believes that the goal of complaisant society is to bring ab by a secure and invariable arrangement among human beings living in a biotic community which most reflects the state of nature.
To understand political power right, and amount it from its original, we must consider, what state all men are of course in, and that is, a state of perfect freedom to order their actions, and urge of their will powers and persons, as they think fit . . . A state as well as of equality, wherein all the power and jurisdiction is reciprocal, no one having more than than than other; there being nothing more evident, than that creatures of the said(prenominal) species and rank . . . should also be equal one amongst another without subordination or subjection . . . But though this be
Pateman would find support from Rousseau, however, with her fury on the desirability of as much engagement as possible at every level of society by every individual. Both Pateman and Rousseau argue that democracy demands such participation--including participation in the control of property which is involved in the participatory workplace. Rousseau far more than Locke advocates a true democracy, and far more than Locke trusts the individual with true liberty to make his or her sustain decisions.
. . . The act that institutes the government is not a contract just a law; . . . the trustees of the executive power are not the masters of the populace but its officers; that it can establish and seclude them when it pleases . . . (Rousseau, 1987, p. 202).
Pateman, Carole.
(1970). Participation and democratic theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
The first person who, having enclosed a plot of land, took it into his head to say this is mine . . . was the true join of civil society. What crimes, wars, murders, what miseries and horrors would the human race have been spared, had someone . . . cried out to his fellow men: 'Do not listen to this impostor. You are mixed-up if you forget that the fruits of the earth belong to all and the earth to no one!' (Rousseau, 1987, p. 60).
With respect to the participatory workplace, in theory and practice, as described by Pateman, it is again inevitable to conclude that Rousseau more than Locke favors the underlying principles involved. Keeping in mind that Locke places property and its possession and control at the heart of democracy and representative government, it is wee-wee that the participatory workplace would simply be too socialistic for Locke's taste. At the same time, it must be noted, as Pateman does, that Locke was not entirely opposed to a participatory-oriented government or society:
Locke, John. (1980). Second treatise of government. Indianapolis: Hackett.
Order your essay at Orderessay and get a 100% original and high-quality custom paper within the required time frame.
No comments:
Post a Comment