Second Treatise of Government

Read this for Harvard's Justice course. Locke is at first seems like a good ally for libertarians. He is not. Locke's reasoning is grounded on two things: natural rights and consent. If you thought about what he says carefully, there's a lot of room for exploitation if ever we implement a government based solely on Locke's idea. At first, his condemnation of arbitrary seems appealing. It is but, if I got this correctly, what is arbitrary and what is not is based on laws the majority agreed upon. My main concern is exploiting that. As long as it's not arbitrary and it doesn't infringes our natural rights, it is permissible but you can exploit that you are just at the edge of the line. You are near the line but you don't cross it. That's my concern. He even justified some things which in my opinion is not permissible like land taking. I may be wrong since I had hard time reading and understanding this text.

I'm not sure what to rate this book. It was a difficult read. Locke had serious issues with punctuation and sentences that covered half a page. It was basically not an easy read, and I also think he tended to ramble. In addition, there were several instances where he referred to God as more or less a final arbitrator. I don't think God needs to be used to justify the ideas. ANyway, I liked some of the ideas, but it really was a case of me forcing my way through the book.