Two Treatises of Government

Written by John Locke

Narrated by James Langton

Often considered the foundation of political liberalism, John Locke's Two Treatises of Government was first published anonymously in 1689, in the wake of England's Glorious Revolution. In The First Treatise of Government, Locke refutes the idea of divine monarchy, while The Second Treatise of Government articulates Locke's philosophy of government, which he based upon his theories of natural rights and the social contract. In Locke's view, governments' legitimacy is based upon their performance of their proper functions—preservation of the life, liberty, and property rights of their citizens, and protection from those who seek to violate these rights.



A radical doctrine at the time of its publication, Locke's theories provided a philosophical basis for many of the principles behind the American Revolution. More than 300 years after the publication of the Two Treatises of Government, Locke's ideas continue to spark debate. A must-listen for anyone interested in the foundations of contemporary political ideology, Locke's hugely influential work will retain its relevance for generations to come.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Tantor Media, Inc
• Release date: Mar 28, 2011
• ISBN: 9781452671420

John Locke

John Locke (1632-1704) was an English philosopher and physician who became one of the most important voices of the Enlightenment period and is known as the "father of liberalism." Among the first of the "empiricists," Locke was a great believer in drawing knowledge from facts and evidence rather than faith and belief. His political philosophy argued for a representational government wherein the power of the monarchy can be checked and the people had a say in the affairs of state. His writings inspired Voltaire and Rousseau - among many others - and his ideas helped the American revolutionaries craft the United States' founding documents.

Reviews for Two Treatises of Government

[David Slaton · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

Hard to believe that Mr. Locke lived in the 17th century and his influence is still strong today. His fingerprints are everywhere and his political force touches our lives today.

[paul_s-289480 · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

A lot of it is wasted on pointless argumentation about what exactly does the Bible say about the right to rule. There's a lot of Bible quoting and it doesn't get sensible until halfway through. The rest of it is groundbreaking nevertheless quite common sense nowadays. Except the bit about rulers not being allowed to appoint other rulers who were not elected directly by the people and ceding any law making power to them. Sounds like what is annoying people about the EU.

[mattries37315 · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

Originally published in the wake of the Glorious Revolution these two essays were neglected due to a glut of tracts and treatise in support of the events of 1689-90, it wasn’t until the 1760s that they become important in political discourse. Two Treatise of Government by John Locke were a refutation of absolute monarchy and the theory of the state of nature and how government is created.

The less famous First Treatise is a straight line for line critique of Sir Robert Filmer’s divine right absolutist monarch supporting tract, Patriarcha, the conclusion of which Locke examines the Bible and history to demolish Filmer’s hypothesis. In the Second Treatise Locke turns from Filmer’s work into his own theories of the state of nature and how it eventually led to the formation of a government by contract between individuals. Overall, the First Treatise is slog with Locke apparently having to repeat the same evidence to refute Filmer and essentially isn’t needed to understand its follow-up. On the other hand, the Second Treatise begins slowly as Locke references Filmer until transition to his own theory of the state of nature that leads to his own contract theory that is thought-provoking and historically influential.

Two Treatise of Government while being connected as a refutation and then opposing argument, the latter work by John Locke this is more profound not only as political theory and from an historical perspective.

[Lector de Colectivo · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

It is an interesting book that contrasts with Hobbes' thesis on the wickedness of man. Here, humanity would reach a civil pact to improve and avoid problems, and from there, Locke presents his thesis on the separation of powers and also the inherent nature of power concerning leaders. It is quite engaging and interesting. (Translated from Spanish)

[meditationesmartini · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

I doubt very much that anyone nowadays is going to quibble with Locke's anti-divine right of kings position. But he has nothing to put in his place but "protection of property" i.e. unfettered global capitalism and that whole filthy liberal project--and when both conservative (Burke) and proto-"reform liberalism" (Mill) thinkers would so easily go him one better in terms of compassion, inspiration, and humanity, that seems a tad feeble. (To say nothing of the religious, Utopian, and revolutionary alternative traditions.) Also he doesn't come to terms at all with the slave trade, at best, and condones it at worst, and elides over the gross exclusionary implications of his focus on poverty with glib talk about social contract v. state of war, and I think that's just cowardly. "Right of conquest" my fucking cock, Johnny, and while the yucky seepage of your venal, pedantic ideas into documents like the American Declaration of Independence may have dragged the discourse in a less sanguinary-absolutist direction and we can all appreciate that (and the "right of conquest" is to a certain degree balanced by the "right of revolution"), they also did more than almost any other writing to permit our greed-based society. The word "property" should never appear in anyone's foundational principles, ever.

[chellinsky · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

Locke's Two Treatises of Government surprisingly lived up to my expectations. He argues in two parts: 1) apologists for monarchical governments are wrong and 2) the people of a society are the ones with ultimate power and sway over the social contract. This latter argument is the more important part for contemporary and present-day people that want to understand this thing we call "freedom." However, without the first Treatise, the second loses its context–it demonstrates Locke's motivation.

Additionally, I found the introductory material to the Cambridge Student Edition edited by Peter Laslett fascinating. Laslett provides context surround thing the history of the text alongside some useful analysis of Locke that made reading the Two Treatises much easier.

Locke should be required reading--to some extent--for people that wish to participate in and benefit from a democracy.