Equality and inequality in Political Theories - Essay Example

Importance of Equality and inequality in Political Theories Order No. 803363 Introduction John Locke, (1632 – 1704) an English philosopher, in his book titled ‘Second Treatise of Government’ (Locke, 1980) gives us insightful information on one of the most sought after and debated topics, the importance of equality and inequality within the framework of his political theory. Rousseau, another eminent political theorist, highlights the importance of equality and inequality and how it impacts society, in his book titled ‘The Basic Political Writings’ (Rousseau. 1987) In this essay, we attempt to articulate and critically analyze the concepts of both the theorists Locke and Rousseau and try to have a better understanding of these important concepts and how to incorporate them into society to ensure a better standard of life. According to Locke, in order to understand political power in the right sense of the word, we should first of all attempt to understand man within a natural setting. In such a natural state or condition, man possesses total freedom or liberty to act as he thinks fit. In so doing, a sense of equality is achieved because in his natural setting, all belong to the same species and everyone’s actions are mutual and reciprocal. In such a setting, no one has more power over another, since all men have the same rank and the same advantages without fear of ‘subordination or subjection.’ (Locke, 8) However, Locke draws our attention to an important point that deals with man in his natural settings. He sheds light on the liberty of man by explaining to us that even though man has full liberty to disburse his actions or possessions in any way he deems fit, yet he does not have the liberty to destroy himself. He brings to our notice, that there is a law of nature that governs the state of nature and it is this law of nature that teaches man to reason and makes him responsible for his actions even though he has the liberty to act at his will. Locke, highlights the fact that though mankind are all equal and independent, yet, no one has the right to harm himself, nor his fellow beings life, possessions, his health nor his liberty in any way because everyone was created for the use of the other. (Locke, 9) However, if a person goes against the law of nature, then a person has the right to secure the law of nature by punishing the offender and bringing peace and harmony to the community of mankind. (Locke, 10) In chapter III, Locke speaks in sharp contrast about the State of War, as against the State of Nature. He rightly explains that the state of war only leads to enmity and destruction. According to Locke (13) man does not have his own liberty because his life is ruled by the ones in authority and power. He is no longer free to act as he wishes because he is defenseless and lives in constant threat to his life. Man no longer follows the common law of nature where all are equal and he has a voice in the community of mankind, but on the other hand he lives a dangerous life faced with ‘force and violence’. (Locke, 13) Jean – Jacques Rousseau, in his book, ‘The Basic Political Writings’ (1987) highlights the importance of equality in our society and the impact it has on humanity as a whole. According to Rousseau, the more we move away from equality, the more our natures get corrupted. He compartmentalized equality as two different kinds – 1) natural, 2) Social. By natural inequality he meant inequalities in an individual’s physical appearance, intelligence or strength. Rousseau rightly points out that changes cannot legitimately be done in such inequalities that occur naturally. However, significant changes can occur when there are social inequalities. According to Rousseau, inequality in the distribution of property seems to be the root cause and needs to be totally eradicated from our society. Highlighting the basic policies within a modern society, Rousseau points out that the creation of society poses to be a threat against the laws occurring in nature. Rousseau strongly feels that inequalities in the ownership of personal property leads to a situation where people in higher status rule or govern people who are at the lower strata of society. This kind of a situation automatically leads to forming a political system. Rousseau’s thoughts and ideas as laid down in “The Basic Political Writings” are extremely thought provoking and voices the general will of society with regard to natural and social inequalities. Rousseau believes that morality has its roots in society resulting from evolution. He explains that a child begins its life without having to know a language or without belonging to any particular community, nor having to adhere to any moral code, (Rousseau, 20) but it is society that teaches him these things as he becomes mature enough to absorb them. Therefore, it is society that dictates what is moral or immoral within societal parameters. Hence, Rousseau points out that we are not born with an innate moral sense. As we move into society we exhibit a capacity for vice as well as virtue. Vice, in Rousseau’s opinion is born of competition. He gives us an example to prove this by stating that primitive people only worried about the basic amenities in life and once this was satisfied, they were content with their lives. However, it was not the same with people in a modern society. Inequality between the haves and have nots has significantly increased and the level of competition drives people into vices in order to satisfy their feelings of being an accepted member of society. Rousseau explains that such people live in their own imaginary world and identify themselves with costly objects and lose direction of who they actually are. They may be rich and successful but they are not authentic and ultimately are losers. In Rousseau’s opinion, belonging to a huge society with an inequality in the distribution of wealth would definitely trigger high competitiveness which leads to different vices. However, if an individual lived within a small community where they are familiar with one another and there is a good sense of solidarity, then one could expect to lead a peaceful life which is not only happy and satisfying but also free from the pressures of inequality and stress of every day struggles to satisfy their imaginary world. (Rousseau, 21) Highlighting the fact of inequality with the modern society, Rousseau recommends that if we are to achieve what we are truly capable of as human beings, it is necessary to live in a society that recommends living in close proximity and with equality in every sense of the word and if such inequalities are not banished from society, we would always be at odds with ourselves and with others in our society. (Rousseau, 22) In conclusion I would say that both Locke as well as Rousseau hold their own opinions about equality and inequality. According to Locke, man is governed by the laws of nature and if he went against those laws he is liable for punishment. However, in Rousseau’s opinion, living with nature makes all men equal and free from vices. In the second stance Locke takes he feels that it is war that determines inequalities in society because man has no freedom of his own but has to live in the shadow of fear of those in authority. The argument Rousseau makes on this point is that inequalities in society are brought about by the unequal distribution of wealth which leads to different vices. In my opinion, both theorists have valid points that they justify and framing new rules in the government to remove these inadequacies would be a good step in the right direction. Works Cited John Locke, Second Treatise of Government, ed. C.B. Macpherson, Hackett Publishing Co., 1980 Jean-Jacques Rousseau, The Basic Political Writings, trans. D. A. Cress, Hackett Publishing Co., 1987 References John Locke, Second Treatise of Government, ed. C.B. Macpherson, Hackett Publishing Co., 1980 Jean-Jacques Rousseau, The Basic Political Writings, trans. D. A. Cress, Hackett Publishing Co., 1987 Read More