Two Treatises of Government · Chapter
XVIII: Of Tyranny explained
Locke defines tyranny as the exercise of power beyond right, for private advantage rather than the public good.
What happens
Locke defines tyranny as the exercise of power beyond right, for private advantage rather than the public good. He argues that tyranny can occur in any form of government, not just monarchy, and that where law ends, tyranny begins. He justifies resistance to unlawful force, distinguishing between the sacred person of the prince and illegal acts by subordinates, and warns that a long train of actions showing a design to subvert the laws may justify opposition.
Themes in this chapter
Limited Government and Rule of Law
Locke emphasizes that a king must rule according to law, and that exceeding legal bounds constitutes tyranny.
Right to Revolution
Locke justifies resistance to unlawful force and argues that when governors act tyrannically, the people may oppose them.
Natural Rights and Liberty
The chapter underscores the protection of properties, liberties, and lives as the end of government, violated by tyranny.
Characters to notice
- Sir Robert Filmer
Implied as the target of Locke's critique of absolute power, though not directly named in this chapter.
- Noah
Referenced in King James I's speech regarding the pact God made with Noah after the deluge, used to illustrate the binding nature of laws.
- Adam
Mentioned in the context of 'sons of Adam' to illustrate that great power does not justify oppression.
Key passages
“As usurpation is the exercise of power, which another hath a right to, so tyranny is the exercise of power beyond right, which nobody can have a right to.”
Usurpation is taking power that belongs to someone else; tyranny is using power in a way that no one has a right to, for private gain rather than public good.
Locke's core definition of tyranny as power exercised beyond right.
“Wherever law ends, tyranny begins, if the law be transgressed to another’s harm; and whosoever in authority exceeds the power given him by the law, and makes use of the force he has under his command, to compass that upon the subject, which the law allows not, ceases in that to be a magistrate; and, acting without authority, may be opposed as any other man, who by force invades the right of another.”
Tyranny starts where law stops, when someone in authority uses force beyond what the law permits. Such a person is no longer a magistrate and can be resisted like any ordinary aggressor.
Locke's justification for resistance to illegal acts by those in power.
“May the commands then of a prince be opposed? may he be resisted as often as anyone shall find himself aggrieved, and but imagine he has not right done him? This will unhinge and overturn all polities, and, instead of government and order, leave nothing but anarchy and confusion.”
A hypothetical objection: if anyone can resist a prince whenever they feel wronged, it would lead to chaos.
Locke anticipates and addresses the objection that his argument invites anarchy.
“force is to be opposed to nothing but to unjust and unlawful force; whoever makes any opposition in any other case, draws on himself a just condemnation both from God and man; and so no such danger or confusion will follow, as is often suggested.”
Resistance is only justified against unjust force; otherwise it is condemned. Thus, no chaos results from his principle.
Locke's key distinction limiting resistance to unlawful force.