John Locke vs. Thomas Hobbes

by Christian Ledford—

At the time of Locke, where absolute monarchs feigning divine appointment laid claim to sovereignty over other human beings, these ideas of universal, natural human rights were radical. To argue that, despite class, race, or ability, each individual possessed equal and inalienable rights to life, liberty, and property was radical. To argue that rights came not from strength, brutality, or authoritarians who loved strength and brutality but instead from God was radical. Ultimately, this radical understanding of natural rights was entirely a result of the personal faith of John Locke, a theist, a believer, and a Christian who used the Bible to make some of the most compelling arguments for universal human rights in all of history.

Locke’s basis of his natural rights philosophy in the Bible, although radical at the time, is something rather obvious with an analysis of the text. When the Bible says “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him” (Genesis 1:27), the basis of natural rights as a grant and gift from God is established. When the Bible says “Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed” (Genesis 9:6), the prohibition on violating the human rights of others that were endowed by God is established. When the Bible says “The rich and the poor meet together; the Lord is the maker of them all” (Proverbs 22:2), the basis of the universality of human rights is established. It’s no wonder at all why half of the Biblical Ten Commandments deal with protecting the rights of individuals from violation. It’s no wonder at all why Jesus Christ spent a majority of his Earthly life and ministry advocating for the protection of the weak, the poor, and the powerless. Ultimately, the liberal idea of negative human rights and the necessity of their protection is a very Biblical idea undeniably and inseparably rooted in the personal Christian belief and faith possessed by John Locke.

Of course, this bears monumental relevance in our modern political paradigm and also levies a frightening indictment on how human rights are understood today. While frustrated masses desperately yearn for the promises of entitlements to education, healthcare, safety, and security, made by leftism, socialism, and even communism, ideas on what natural rights are become muddled, subjective, and intangible; Leftism, at a base level, posits that the rights of individual are not only able to be violated but also justified in being violated as long as their violation serves the supposed wellbeing of the collective. Similarly, a frightening rise in rightwing nationalism that targets the rights of individuals and subjugates them to the collective based on race, gender, sexuality, and class creates just as many enemies of natural rights on the opposing side of the political spectrum. Meanwhile, outnumbered defenders of natural rights hardly seem to know what rights even are or where they come from, as they desperately cling to documents such as the U.S. Constitution as their only defense, ignoring the fact that every single individual right specified by the Constitution would still exist even if a centuries-old piece of paper didn’t say they did.

• 22 December 2020
• Author: Guest Blogger
• Number of views: 1401
• Comments: 0