This concept of separation of powers influenced James Madison when writing The US Constitution because it ensured that one branch of government could not gain more power than another. Although both were immensely influential, John Locke was more because he shaped the founding of the United States. Locke influenced in the formation of the Declaration of Independence with his redefined ideas on the nature of government and every human’s natural
My Values of Equality Milton Friedman, an American economist, in his article “Created Equal”, points out his concept about “Created Equal”. Friedman discusses the different ways that humans are considered to be equal, and then he declares three specific categories for human equality: equality before God, equality of opportunity and equality of outcome. Friedman argues that the first equality is the Founders’ use, the second equality is compatible with liberty, and the third equality is socialism. Equality is such a beautiful word that everyone should appreciate, and Friedman claims his points about its concept from his own comprehension. I really respect Friedman’s points about equality; however, there is something critical about equality which
In the end, I will conclude that the decision of Plessy v. Ferguson is a pernicious decision. A general interpretation of the Equal Protection of Laws clause would mean that every individual must be treated in the same manner as others in similar conditions and circumstances. A breach of this clause would take place if the individual is forbidden from entering a certain area only because he/she belongs to a particular race etc. However, the US Supreme Courts have interpreted this clause in a different way. The equal protection clause was interpreted as an equal application of all laws.
He proclaims the state of nature in which everyone is born free and equal. “It is also a state of equality, in which no-one has more power and authority than anyone else” (Locke, 3). Everyone is familiar of the natural laws, in which maintaining peace and abstaining from harming others was a duty. This was an essential piece in preserving human race. “To do as much as he can to preserve the rest of mankind” (Locke, 4).
In A Theory of Justice, Rawls aim to justify the principles of justice as fairness by reference to individual rational choice. He grounds his view on the ideas on “society as a fair system of cooperation” and of “citizens as free and equal persons” (Rawls 1995:11). Acknowledging that people have diverse interests, the tries to answer to how they can reach an agreement in matters of justice. The conception of justice as fairness is important in order to understand the logic of principle of justice. In this hypothetical situation of equal liberty, Raws states that free and equal persons concerned to further their own interests define the fundamental terms of their association.
Rousseau, meanwhile, believes that man is equal in harmony in the state of nature and then unequal in developed society. Thus, both men would evaluate the statement that “in a legitimate state all men are free and there is no inequality,” differently. Rousseau would mostly disagree, holding that the state itself is the impetus for inequality. Hobbes would largely agree, contending that men are equal both in a primitive state of conflict and under a sovereign’s awesome power. These different responses result from the philosophers’ opposing views on fundamental human nature, civil society’s raison d’etre, and government’s inevitable form.
Rule two mentioned that all men have the right to liberty, property, security, and resistance to oppression. And finally, rule 3: all men are free to do anything they want to exercise these natural rights with no limitations except those made by law, and as long as nobody is being stripped of their same rights. As you have noticed, Documents 1 and 4 all use the subject word man. Here, man is not being used as gender neutral. Only men could enjoy and exercise these privileges, as explained in Document 7.
In the Declaration of Independence, there is a famous phrase that is saying that all human are created equally and similarly—regardless of his or her race, skin color, religion etc. The phrase also implies that life, liberty and happiness are three examples of unalienable rights that are given by the Creator and should be protect by the government. Thus, it means that the rights of equality, freedom and happiness of each of individual in the United States are not given by the government, thus it cannot been taken away. However, when we try to look at what the slaves or Black Americans faced during that time and how the white people treat black people unequally, we can say that these words in the Declaration of Independence about the unalienable rights are really contradict with what has been practiced and clearly exposed the
According to this, we all possess equally fundamental and objectively verifiable natural rights that guarantee our enjoyment of some fundamentally identifiable basic goods. The Natural law was claimed to be above the actual social and political systems and the natural rights were presented as rights that the individuals possessed regardless of society or political systems and as ultimately valid irrespective of whether they were recognized by an institution or authority or not. The well-known 17th Century philosopher John Locke was the quintessential proponent of this idea. He wrote the Two Treatises of Government (1688) in which he argued that the individuals possess natural rights, independently of the political recognition given to them by the state or authority. According to Locke, these natural rights exist even before the formation of any political community and were based on the natural law that originated from God.
In the state of nature Hobbes describes a condition in which mankind is completely free. He claims everyone would have the right to anything. There are no duties binding people and no one would have any obligations. In this environment everyone is a judge of good and evil, there would be neither set rules nor guidelines. With these rights in place Hobbes deems it could only result in such bloody chaos.