The Democratic View: Locke's Social Contract

John Locke must stand as one of the major visionaries of democratic political philosophy. His view of the political organization of society as a social contract [or "compact", as he calls it] provided an illuminating metaphor, and a foundation upon which he could establish the rights and responsibilities of the individual and the government. How does this apply to the programs of democratic parties? I draw your attention to paragraph 89 below, wherein Locke declares that individual consent to unite with a political entity authorises that entity to make laws for the public good. The phenomenon of "every man for himself" exists in the state of nature, not in the state of political society.

Here then are excerpts from his major work on the subject, Second Treatise of Government:
Book II
C H A P. II.
Of the State of Nature.
Sect. 4. TO understand political power right, and derive it from its original, we must consider, what state all men are naturally in, and that is, a state of perfect freedom to order their actions, and dispose of their possessions and persons, as they think fit, within the bounds of the law of nature, without asking leave, or depending upon the will of any other man. A state also of equality, wherein all the power and jurisdiction is reciprocal, no one having more than another; there being nothing more evident, than that creatures of the same species and rank, promiscuously born to all the same advantages of nature, and the use of the same faculties, should also be equal one amongst another without subordination or subjection, unless the lord and master of them all should, by any manifest declaration of his will, set one above another, and confer on him, by an evident and clear appointment, an undoubted right to dominion and sovereignty.
CHAP. VII.
Of Political or Civil Society.
Sec. 89. Where-ever therefore any number of men are so united into one society, as to quit every one his executive power of the law of nature, and to resign it to the public, there and there only is a political, or civil society. And this is done, where-ever any number of men, in the state of nature, enter into society to make one people, one body politic, under one supreme government; or else when any one joins himself to, and incorporates with any government already made: for hereby he authorizes the society, or which is all one, the legislative thereof, to make laws for him, as the public good of the society shall require; to the execution whereof, his own assistance (as to his own decrees) is due. And this puts men out of a state of nature into that of a common-wealth, by setting up a judge on earth, with authority to determine all the controversies, and redress the injuries that may happen to any member of the commonwealth; which judge is the legislative, or magistrates appointed by it. And where-ever there are any number of men, however associated, that have no such decisive power to appeal to, there they are still in the state of nature.
CHAP. VIII.
Of the Beginning of Political Societies.
Sec. 99. Whosoever therefore out of a state of nature unite into a community, must be understood to give up all the power, necessary to the ends for which they unite into society, to the majority of the community, unless they expresly agreed in any number greater than the majority. And this is done by barely agreeing to unite into one political society, which is all the compact that is, or needs be, between the individuals, that enter into, or make up a commonwealth. And thus that, which begins and actually constitutes any political society, is nothing but the consent of any number of freemen capable of a majority to unite and incorporate into such a society. And this is that, and that only, which did, or could give beginning to any lawful government in the world.

http://www.gutenberg.org/catalog/world/readfile?fk_files=28217&pageno=1

Parlor Wit

H. L. Mencken points out a danger in a democracy. ;)

As democracy is perfected, the office represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. We move toward a lofty ideal. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their hearts desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.

The Baltimore Evening Sun, July 26, 1920


http://www.wisdomquotes.com/002925.html

The Democratic Ideal: Pericles

Pericles was not the founder of Greek democracy, but he was one of its greatest defenders, in word and deed. Although he was not recognized as a philosopher, his Funeral Oration, as reported by Thucydides in History of the Peloponnesian Wars, bequeaths us this eloquent and stirring definition of democracy:

"Our constitution does not copy the laws of neighbouring states; we are rather a pattern to others than imitators ourselves. Its administration favours the many instead of the few; this is why it is called a democracy. If we look to the laws, they afford equal justice to all in their private differences; if no social standing, advancement in public life falls to reputation for capacity, class considerations not being allowed to interfere with merit; nor again does poverty bar the way, if a man is able to serve the state, he is not hindered by the obscurity of his condition. The freedom which we enjoy in our government extends also to our ordinary life. There, far from exercising a jealous surveillance over each other, we do not feel called upon to be angry with our neighbour for doing what he likes, or even to indulge in those injurious looks which cannot fail to be offensive, although they inflict no positive penalty. But all this ease in our private relations does not make us lawless as citizens. Against this fear is our chief safeguard, teaching us to obey the magistrates and the laws, particularly such as regard the protection of the injured, whether they are actually on the statute book, or belong to that code which, although unwritten, yet cannot be broken without acknowledged disgrace.”

Could modern democratic parties define their vision of the democratic ideal so succinctly and compellingly?

Budarin
http://ancienthistory.about.com/library/bl/bl_thucydides_funeral.htm?rd=1

First Post!

Dear Reader,

This is my first blog post, and I am having to learn some things as I go. Like how to post graphics here! I'll put some up as soon as I figure that out.

The idea for this blog grew from my observation, over the last several years, that the democratic movement in the U.S. had forgotten its philosophical foundations. Its political party was engaging in little more than developing issue platforms. Issue platforms are necessary, it's true. But it is even more critical that we be able to articulate the philosophical perspective, ideas and values which underlie those party platforms. Our philosophy is the pillar which supports the platforms we build upon it.

So, in following posts, I propose to present elements of democratic philosophy which I believe could be of use in that endeavor.

Alex Budarin