This Article Full Text (OnlineFirst PDF) All Versions of this Article: 0090591708317899v1 36/4/495    most recent Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Google Scholar Articles by Farr, J. Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

Locke, Natural Law, and New World Slavery

^* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: james-farr{at}northwestern.edu.

	Abstract

This essay systematically reformulates an earlier argument about Locke and new world slavery, adding attention to Indians, natural law, and Locke’s reception. Locke followed Grotian natural law in constructing a just-war theory of slavery. Unlike Grotius, though, he severely restricted the theory, making it inapplicable to America. It only fit resistance to "absolute power" in Stuart England. Locke was nonetheless an agent of British colonialism who issued instructions governing slavery. Yet they do not inform his theory—or vice versa. This creates hermeneutical problems and raises charges of racism. If Locke deserves the epithet "racist," it is not for his having a racial doctrine justifying slavery. None of this makes for a flattering portrait. Locke’s reputation as the champion of liberty would not survive the contradictions in which new world slavery ensnared him. Evidence for this may be found in Locke’s reception, including by Southern apologists for slavery.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?