John Locke wrote ‘The Letter Concerning Toleration’ among all people. At the time, there were diversities exhibited by people especially in matters regarding religions and faith. The letter called for toleration, bearing that Catholicism was taking root and becoming strong in Europe, especially in England. Due to the fact that there were many religions in the world, and all of them claimed to be the most powerful, and have a majority of followers, Locke saw that the only way to a peaceful coexistence would be through toleration of each other, regardless of which faith a person subscribed. Christianity was a major faith in America, and all the Christians believed in Christ. Therefore, there was no need of finding differences present in the religions, as they would cause strife while Christ advocated for peace and love among all. all people believe in God and Christ, and that their ways are right and true there is therefore, no need in finding fault in other Christian churches because they show difference from what a person thinks is orthodox, he stated that all people belief that they are orthodox to themselves (Locke 1).
Also, he stated that being a ruler, does not make one more knowledgeable in matters pertaining to religion or Christianity. Instead being a ruler gave a person the authority and power to do things that need an outward force. These include protecting life and making laws that would guide and protect people. Rulers should not enforce a certain religion as the truest of them all; as such an action defies the law and results in oppression. Therefore, leaders and rulers should concern themselves with their duties instead of forcing people to subscribe to a particular religion (Locke 1).
Additionally, he advised that both the church and the state should perform their duties without interfering with each other’s activities. Such a practice will help promote peace and tolerances between the two, promoting a peaceful coexistence of the two free from religious conflicts and ensuring that people are granted the Freedom of Worship, which is a fundamental right. Inaddition to that, Locke stated that churches were voluntary societies no one is born a member of any church and people are at liberty to leave if they find the churches’ doctrines and practices questionable. Therefore, being a believer of a particular church’s doctrines is an expression of one’s freedom of choice and worship. He gave an example that as an Anglican, he though that Jewish and Catholic beliefs were false, but they should be tolerated (Locke 2).
Finally, Locke thinks lowly of people who think that they practice the ‘correct’ religion and want to sell or enforce it to others. These people are radicals but with liberal ideas. They want everyone to subscribe to their schools of thought. There are also people that are conservative, but anti-liberalists. These want people to subscribe to the right things, be it Church, God, gender and equality or any other thing. He argues against both these and instead calls for tolerance of diversity that is exhibited by the Human race.
Locke thought that these views on tolerance and encouragement of diversity were difficult to enforce. However, the current society shows that it is indeed possible and practical to allow everyone the freedom of Choice and Worship as it prevents conflicts that would otherwise erupt if people were forced to subscribe to a religion they do not want, or that which they feel that its doctrines and practices are unorthodox.
Rousseau-Discourse Concerning Inequality
Fear hold back people from communicating what is in the heart. However, it does not affect Rousseau, in what in what he wants to put across. He addresses men in particular, as they are the victims of the subject matter. Before judging the results, Rousseau first acknowledges the concept of inequality. In the human species, the assumptions are that there is physical or natural, and moral or political inequality. These variations are subject to nature, age difference, Mindy qualities, strength, amongst others. In most scenarios, men are ones who establish and authorize them as they want more favor, honor, riches and power than the others can do. Asking the source of inequality is senseless as the definition of the word itself serves the purpose. Above all, asking for the connection between the two types of inequality would sound as if those who obey are better than the commanders are (Rousseau 1). Philosophers are therefore aiming to work in the state of nature since it is sensitive to the foundation of the society regardless s of its form.
According to Rousseau (2), the real founder of the society is the ones who made people believe in the concept of “this is mine.” It is nice to realize that consequences of horror, crimes, and misfortunes affect us all in one way or the other and that no one owns the earth. For that reason, everyone should be ready to help the others. The state of nature, therefore, seems to take root from all angles of human reactions. Personal existence and self-preservations were the man’s initial feelings. Thus, fate has taught him how to utilize each of them. Rousseau has also proven that when a man is idle, there are chances of producing animally acts. Everything that was available changed with time as space limitations, completion amongst others crawled to nature. Man learned to fight against these challenges with time which made him become active a day after the other. Otherwise, he can lose necessity to stronger persons.
Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels
Communism promotes the freedom of the proletariat, which is a community that survives through the sake labor, without making profits from any resource or capital. Both Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels wrote the Communist Manifesto as well as the principles that would guide communism. Communism entailed the provision of labor and services to the bourgeoisie class of people in the society, without the laborer making any profits. However, it would be different from slavery in that the laborers were free members of the society who were forced to work, arguing that exploitation of one class by a higher one is the force behind development (Englels 1).
Friedrich and Marx were both of the idea that for development to occur, people must relinquish their inheritance, a progressive income tax is made mandatory, an abolition of private property, and also the provision of free public education. These have the ability to equalize people. Additionally, the two promoted the centralization of the credit and loan facilities by the state through the use of the national bank and finally, the nationalization of transport and communication. When these are done, working class people are stripped of all their property and preferences, and forced to work for higher classes, known as the bourgeoisie. Additionally, universal and equal employment opportunities would arise for the proletarians.
Friedrich also differentiated communism from socialism that was prevalent at the time. He is of the opinion that unlike other socialist doctrines used at the time, communism had the power to lead a state into remarkable development. That was because communism would eventually lead to the bourgeoisie industrial revolution, causing development not seen in any part of the world, at the time. During these times, Europe wanted to be a superpower, hence the rise of communism among some of the European countries such as Germany. The people were made to work for their survival as all resources would be shared among all. Capitalistic ideas were frowned upon (Marx and Engels 2).
The State: It’s Historic Role
The objective of this article is to give an insight of what the state has already done, what is doing and what it ought to do in the future. Socialists have different perception regarding the state, with some believing that the state can achieve social revolution, while others believe the state is an obstacle to social revolution, and the only way to engage the community is by thinking about the state and how it can benefit the community.
In real sense, society is different from state, and so is state from the government. The government is there to instill laws to the society on what should be done and how it should be done. Even though the governmental roles are not well understood, studies about its past and future plans can help in understanding it. The Roman Empire is a good example of a state which had seen its improvement since imposing the laws, and this has led to a magnificent change in their ways of life that is admirable (Kropotkin 1).
Philosophers of the eighteenth century believed that society emerged from an agreement with the state to endorse socialization instead of fighting everyday without purpose. This gave rise to the belief that social contract was important to define the rights of the kings, which according to Kropotkin was false. The society did exist before the man discovered it, and the tribe resulted into mankind consisting of different generations. Each tribe had its own way of doing things, but all tribes respected human life and hated spilling of human blood as well as murder, but anytime different tribes met, they resulted in war. However, international law was initiated to control people’s action towards each other, and later a general law that endorsed revenge against each offender. Tribal facts were common, but with time, disruption among the tribes was inescapable, and this resulted into communal possession of land and establishment of Christianity that ensured all people were settled and lived in peace and harmony (Kropotkin 2).
Works Cited
Locke, John. “Constitution Society: A Letter Concerning Toleration”. Web. Retrieved in 1989.
Rousseau, Jean, Jacques. “Constitution Society: A dissertation on the origin and foundation of the inequality of humankind and is it authorized by natural law.” Web. Retrieved in 1754.
Engels, Frederick. “The Principles of Communism.” Retrieved in 1847.
Marx Karl and Engels, Frederick. “The Manifesto of Communist Party.” Web. Retrieved on February 1848.
Kropotkin, Peter. “The State: It’s Historic Role.” Web. Retrieved in 1896.
