Ryan Pevnick.

Political Studies, Vol. 57, No. 4, Dec 2009, pp. 846-865.

John Locke's non-religious arguments for tolerance are often seen as inadequate. He is criticized for: (1) failing to give reasons in support of a strict separation between the roles of church and state; and (2) wrongly insisting that the coercion of belief is irrational. I argue that once we understand Locke's arguments for tolerance within the context of his social contract framework, his non-sectarian arguments can circumvent such criticisms. Lockean arguments for tolerance are thus stronger than typically supposed. Adapted from the source document.

Ross J. Corbett.

2009

The tension between executive prerogative in times of emergency and the importance of maintaining and preserving the rule of law has been a perennial concern for modern democratic states. The Lockean Commonwealth reappraises John Locke's contribution to this timely topic. By paying careful attention to the arguments put forward in Locke's famous Two Treatises on Government, Ross J. Corbett advances a new interpretation of Locke's political agenda, one that argues that the interplay between "prerogative" and "legislative supremacy" formed the axis around which turned the practical component of Locke's political theory. With a firm grasp of Locke's historical context, Corbett is able to show how Locke's attempts to balance these competing interests provides insight, not only into the development of the liberal democratic state, but also into questions that trouble us to this day and into questions of political life more generally.; Summary reprinted by permission of SUNY Press

Miriam Bentwich.

Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy (CRISPP), Vol. 12, No. 4, Dec 2009, pp. 491-511.

Various quantitative analyses have stressed the connection between lower socioeconomic status (SES) and low political participation. The general argument behind these studies was that since political participation is crucial for democracy, and since low SES compromises political participation, liberal democratic governments cannot afford such a compromise. This paper argues that presenting political participation as a democratic value, corresponding to a 'positive' right, places the implied argumentation of such studies in a potential conflict with classical liberalism and its contemporary 'successors', emphasizing 'negative' rights alone. However, the tension can be reconciled by employing the political thought of John Locke, one of the forefathers of classical liberalism. Thus, the paper illuminates a strong bond in Locke's thought between democratic political participation and liberal natural rights. In fact, I argue that it is precisely his advocacy of liberal rights that leads to a conception of political participation, converging with democratic theory and redistributive policies. Adapted from the source document.

John B. Kienker.

Thesis, ProQuest, Ann Arbor MI, 2009.

The traditional scholarly consensus holds that the Declaration of Independence owes much of its argument to the influence of John Locke's social contract liberalism. And yet, a dominant view of the relation between the right to the pursuit of happiness and the rest of the document has yet to emerge. An extended treatment of this right has not been published for fifty years, and even the most sustained, thoughtful research too often relies on what one key interpreter has said on the subject -- whether the phrase's immediate author or a prominent political philosopher taken to be decisive. This study considers how the right to the pursuit of happiness was understood as part of American public thought at the time the country was founded. It looks for clues within the Declaration itself and from a wide range of public and private statements made by the document's signers and other citizens, from the American Revolution to the early years of the republic. I conclude with some thoughts on what the pursuit of happiness means for the character of American politics, both at the time of the founding and today. In organizing my study, I have taken Thomas Jefferson on his own testimony when discussing the Declaration, that the argument contained there was not some private eccentricity but "an expression of the American mind." I probe whether the historical record with regard to the pursuit of happiness bears out Jefferson's description. Although I readily admit that there are important distinctions to be made in the political thought of the founding era's most prominent men -- differences that quickly multiply as more names are included -- this study has purposely emphasized what these men held in common. This approach is not only appropriate when considering questions of political ends rather than means, but only in this way can we find a definition of the right to the pursuit of happiness that may be regarded as widely accepted at the time, and that may be considered truly authoritative for the American political tradition. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by addressing your request to ProQuest, 789 E. Eisenhower Parkway, P.O. Box 1346, Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1346. Telephone 1-800-521-3042; e-mail: disspub@umi.com

Andrew Rehfeld.

Hebraic Political Studies, Vol. 3, No. 1, winter 2008, pp. 60-93.

The story of Jephthah (Judges 1112) includes such political elements as a legislative power that appears to transfer its authority directly to a third party; a denial of the Ammonites' 'native right' to intergenerational justice; and God's active intervention in the affairs of man to deliver the Israelites' victory in war. Perhaps the most famous aspect of the story is the vow that accompanies Jephthah's appeal to heaven, which ends up obliging him to sacrifice his own daughter. These central elements of the Jephthah narrative run counter to John Locke's political theory as set forth in his Two Treatises of Government, yet this work refers to the Jephthah pericope time and time again. This essay will present Locke's repeated employment of the tale of Jephthah, particularly in the 'Second Treatise,' as a multi-layered problem with significant implications for future scholarship on Locke's use of the Bible and for political Hebraism more generally. Adapted from the source document.

Alex Tuckness.

Administration & Society, Vol. 40, No. 3, May 2008, pp. 253-270.

John Locke, whose thought greatly influenced the American founding, makes an important contribution to contemporary public administration theory and to our understanding of the history of American public administration. Locke's theory gives an account of why it is legitimate for public administrators to sometimes perform functions that are legislative or judicial in nature and encourages public administrators to interpret directives from those with greater political authority in light of a respect for rights and the public good. Historically, Locke put his ideas into practice as he helped oversee the administration of the early American colonies and made proposals for administrative reform.