Locke argued that the ‘chief and great end, therefore, of men’s uniting into commonwealths, and putting themselves into government’ was to ensure that men were able to ensure that their property is protected by the government (300). The thesis behind this essay will argue that both Locke and Voltaire shared a common belief that the ultimate duty of any government is to secure the happiness and well-being of its people, but that it is not always enough to secure the well-being of the people they are governing. By well-being, Locke referred to government having ‘no other end, but the peace, safety and public good of all the people’ (302).
Locke argued that when men surrender their ‘equality, liberty and executive power’ into ‘the hands of society’ as opposed to ‘the state of nature’, it is to enable individuals to ‘preserve himself, his liberty and his property’ (302). Therefore, it is clear that Locke believed the government was responsible for preserving these three essential rights. However, if any of these laws were ever broken, Locke suggested that it was the right of a government to ‘govern by established standing laws, promulgated and known to the people, and not by extemporary decrees; by indifferent and upright judges’ (302). This shows that Locke believed it was also the duty of the state to punish those who broke these laws. Though Voltaire seems to examine the Presbyterians, Voltaire maintains that it is the duty of the government to preserve the happiness of its people, and not religion, by condemning the Presbyterians for not allowing people to go to ‘operas, plays or concerts in London on Sundays, and even cards are so expressly forbidden’ (36). Voltaire had a clear dislike towards religions that restricted activities that people were entitled to and activities that not even the government would forbid.
Nonetheless, both Locke and Voltaire realise that it is not always possible for the government to be able to maintain the well-being of the people that they are governing. Locke acknowledged that men can be ‘biased by their interest, as well as ignorant for want of study of it,’ which is an admittance that the law is not always guided by men who put the interests of society first (300). This can be applied to interpreting the law as well as certain punishments for crimes can be deemed ‘dangerous’ (Locke 301). Locke was very good at acknowledging that the government is not always the best guardian of people’s well-being. Voltaire suggests that because of the religious practices of groups like the Presbyterians, people’s well-being can be largely ignored by ‘persons of quality’ who judge those that participate in ‘forbidden practices’ like cards (38). Voltaire implies that the rest of the nation’s well-being is preserved because ‘the rest of the nation either go to church, to the tavern, or to see their mistresses’ (38). This implies that the government performs a better role in preserving people’s well-being than certain religious sects.
In conclusion, it is clear that both Locke and Voltaire shared a common belief that it is the duty of the government to protect the well-being of its people. However, Locke believed that governments should also protect people’s property in exchange for surrendering their liberty. Voltaire was critical as to whether or not the government could maintain people’s well-being due to their participation in religious groups that restrict the liberties governments can award their people. Locke doubted that the government could always maintain people’s happiness because it could be run at times by corrupted and self-interested men.
Works cited
Locke, John. Two Treatises on Government. London: R. Butler, W. Reid, W. Sharpe and J. Bumpus, 1821. Print.
Voltaire, Francois-Marie. Letters Concerning the English Nation. London: J. & R. Tonson, D. Midwinter, M. Cooper and J. Hodges, 1778. Print.
