John Locke Tacit Consent

918 Words2 Pages

Locke believes that all men by nature are “free, equal, and independent” (Ch.VIII), meaning if someone doesn’t give up punishing rights then we cant do anything to prevent them from exercising these rights. His analysis begins with individuals living in a state of nature, where they are not subject to a common legitimate authority with the power to establish or settle disputes. He believes the only way one can become stripped of his natural rights is by agreeing to become part of a society. From this natural state of freedom and independence, Locke stresses individual consent as the method by which political societies are created and individuals join those societies. Locke states that a person can become a member of society by using express …show more content…

Locke thinks this defends why resident immigrants have a commitment to follow the laws of the state where they live, however only while they live there. If residents were to accept the benefits the government offers them, then they must also accept whatever rules come along with residing there. Locke thought it would be best to use express and tacit consent to explain how the government could be considered legitimate. Express consent is when you agree actively either by voice or in writing, which you are in agreement with a certain action. An example of this is raising your hand/or signing your name on a contract to indicate your consent. Tacit consent is assumed when you don't actually state your agreement, and raise no objection by voice or in writing, to a certain course of action. An example of tacit consent would be not standing up/ or making any sort of action, this would indicate consent. In order to dissent an individual would have to follow the directions stated, such as signing a piece of paper that would indicate your dissent. In order to determine if the agreement was legitimate there are rules that need to be

Open Document