John Locke’s liberal theory of constitution
Modern constitutionalism concerns the constitution of political authority and the limitation of governmental power through law. These concerns also inform earlier theories of political founding, including contractarian accounts of the origins and legitimacy of political authority. This study aims to demonstrate that Locke’s liberal theory of constitution provides the intellectual ground for the two principal tenets of modern constitutionalism: its democratic and liberal dimensions. It lies in Locke’s revisions to Hobbes’s theory of sovereignty. First, unlike Hobbes, Locke conceptualizes the people not merely as a form of sociality that exists only through the sovereign’s representation and otherwise amounts to nothing more than a multitude, but as a constituent power capable of existing even in the absence of government. Second, the problem of sovereignty, which Hobbes formulates through the logic of infinite regress, leads, for Locke, to an unacceptable model of unlimited government. Such a government, for Locke, remains in the state of nature precisely because of its unlimited discretionary capacity, much like Hobbes’s absolute sovereign. The principle of limited government—which alone renders the democratic principle of constitutionalism meaningful—reveals the distinctive character of Locke’s liberal constitution. Finally, Locke’s constitution also makes it possible to conceive the constitution beyond the principles of constitutionalism. Unlike Hobbes’s sovereign, Locke’s political universe allows us to conceive a political entity capable of limiting governmental power without itself becoming unlimited—as expressed in contractarianism, without becoming the judge in its own case. This, in turn, may lead us toward the idea of a written constitution grounded in Locke’s inalienable rights.
Ackerman, B. (1991). We the people, Vol. 1: Foundations. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Can, M. (2022). The nature and function of the state in the framework of the fundamental principles of libertarian doctrine. Beytulhikme: An International Journal of Philosophy, 12(2), 333–356. https://doi.org/10.18491/beytulhikme.1938
Dyzenhaus, D. (2007). The politics of the question of constituent power. In M. Loughlin & N. Walker (Eds.), The paradox of constitutionalism: Constituent power and constitutional form (pp. 129–146). Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Hobbes, T. (2005). Leviathan (R. Tuck, Ed.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Hobbes, T. (2012). On the citizen. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Kardeş, M. E. (2015). Schmitt'le birlikte Schmitt'e karşı: Politik felsefe açısından Carl Schmitt ve düşüncesi [With Schmitt against Schmitt: Carl Schmitt and his thought from the perspective of political philosophy]. İletişim Yayınları, Istanbul, Türkiye.
Kardeş, M. E. (2021). Thomas Hobbes rasyonalitesinin gerilimleri: Aşkınlık, yasa ve hakikat [Tensions of Thomas Hobbes's rationality: Transcendence, law, and truth]. In M. E. Kardeş (Ed.), Çağımız ve Thomas Hobbes [Our age and Thomas Hobbes] (pp. 77–107). VakıfBank Kültür Yayınları, Istanbul, Türkiye.
Laslett, P. (2005). Introduction. In P. Laslett (Ed.), Two treatises of government (pp. 3–126). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Locke, J. (2005). Two treatises of government. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Loughlin, M. (2022). Against constitutionalism. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA. https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674276567
Murteza, G. (2012). John Locke'da sömürgecilik ve mülkiyet ilişkisi [On the relationship between colonialism and property in John Locke]. Kutadgubilig: Felsefe Bilim Araştırmaları, Spring (21), 371–388. [In Turkish]
Paine, T. (2000). Paine: Political writings (B. Kuklick, Ed.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom. https://doi.org/10.1017/9780511812552
Rızvanoğlu, E. (2020). Locke ve Hume'un kişisel özdeşlik anlayışları bağlamında benlik, bellek ve bilinç [Self, memory and consciousness in the context of Locke and Hume's understanding of personal identity]. Beytulhikme: An International Journal of Philosophy, 10(3), 957–975. [In Turkish] https://doi.org/10.18491/beytulhikme.1639
Schmitt, C. (2005). Political theology: Four chapters on the concept of sovereignty (G. Schwab, Trans.). University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
Schmitt, C. (2014). Dictatorship: From the origin of the modern concept of sovereignty to proletarian class struggle (M. Hoelzl & G. Ward, Trans.). Polity Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Sieyès, E.-J. (2003). Political writings: Including the debate between Sieyès and Tom Paine in 1791 (M. Sonenscher, Trans. & Ed.). Hackett Publishing Company, Indianapolis, IN.
Spitz, J.-F. (2014). Locke's contribution to the intellectual foundations of modern constitutionalism. In Constitutions and the classics (pp. 152–168). Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198714989.003.0006
Strauss, L. (2011). Doğal hak ve tarih [Natural right and history] (M. Erşen & P. Onur, Trans.). Say Yayınları, Istanbul, Türkiye.
Tully, J. (1993). An approach to political philosophy: Locke in contexts. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom.