what english political ideas influenced american ideas about liberty?

Question

?? please help me

Answer 1

The most familiar political statement of this period concerning the people's liberties --the Declaration of Independence-- is frequently pointed to as borrowing from the ideas and language of John Locke. Now the preamble certainly does use Lockean language and categories .. as did many other political documents of the time.

But this is only ONE of the English influences on these documents. There are several other very strong foundation (and I would say MORE important ones) to the arguments Jefferson and others put forward.

In particular, the SUBSTANCE of the Declaration--and its "legal" base-- is built on OTHER foundations, esp. from various English history and political traditions. (I encourage you to especially look at the next section and the LAST section below to see how all of these influences were knowingly combined by the founders.)
______________

So, let's take a closer look. To begin with:

1) in the OPENING appeal of the Declaration, we see the influence of Locke's language of universal "natural rights" of man and the notion of government being 'by the consent of the governed' (which implies, among other things, a denial of the "absolute right of kings")

BUT
2) The middle section listing "GRIEVANCES" of "ABUSES" is the "MEAT" of the document, as THE reasons justifying this particular action, and it is NOT based on Locke at all! Here the appeal is more to the "rights of Englishmen" as historically understood. These understanding are based on OTHER deep-rooted English traditions going back, at least in the view of 17th-18th century writers, to Magna Carta

More specifically, the listing of the king's violations of rights, esp as an argument for REJECTING the rule of a specific king is from the "English Bill of Rights" of 1689 (a key document very familiar to colonial authors). Many of the specific abuses cited are echoed in the Declaration. (Also, the "rights" listed are echoed in both Mason's "Declaration of Rights" and the U.S. Bill of Rights, and elsewhere.) But MORE significant is that the English Bill of Rights provides the basic legal FORM and basis of argument for the Declaration.

See the English Bill of Rights -
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/england.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_of_Rights_1689

The rhetoric of the opening paragraph expands this a bit with the 'universal' language, but as a PRACTICAL matter, the heart of the argument is based on these specifics and on this particular British Constitutional tradition.

3) Some of Locke's arguments --and esp. the critical idea of "consent of the governed" were expressed and put into practice in England (and NEW England) long before Locke. That is, while his RHETORICAL way of packaging some of these things was helpful, the ideas themselves were not original with him. In fact, the "covenant" and "compact" tradition of New England Puritans --drawn in part from their own Reformation teachings about biblical "covenant" and applied to both church and community governments-- were in many ways MORE important than Locke's writings in people's understanding of these ideas in practice (esp the common people who had not read Locke, but HAD participated in local government!)

4) Also note that Jefferson was not himself drawing DIRECTLY on Locke or other British legal and constitutional traditions. His draft echoes MANY other documents written shortly before it. Of special importance are the two parts of the first Constitution for the State of Virginia, which begins with the "Virginia Declaration of Rights" drafted by George Mason [including the Locke echoes] and Jefferson's own draft of Virginia's Constitution, which begins with a very brief intro, then a list of GRIEVANCES.
http://www.teachingamericanhistory.org/library/index.asp?document=105

_____________________

The VARIOUS influences on the thinking of the founders, expressed not just in the Declaration but in many other official documents and political pamphlets, was examined in a classic study by Bernard Bailyn, *The Ideological Origins of the Revolution*. In the opening chapter (worth a good look) he lays out FIVE types of influences -- Locke & other Enlightenment theorists are just one, and they themselves often drew on other, earlier legal and political writings.

The rest are ancient Roman writers and:
a) history of English Common Law ESP. as understand in the 17th century,
b) radical political and social thought of the English Civil War and Commonwealth period up to the Glorious Revolution"Glorious Revolution
c) New England Puritanism's political and social theories based on their idea of "covenant" (and from that, political "compacts")

As a practical matter --related to the actual PRACTICE of government -- these three are MORE important than Lockean theory.
_________________

But Bailyn's book may be a slog, and perhaps hard to get your hands on. I think a BETTER evidence of the combination of ideas and influences is in something the founder THEMSELVES wrote. On October 14, 1774 the FIRST Continental Congress had issued its "Declarations and Resolves" in which it included its set of complaints (very similar to the "abuses" of the Declaration) and called on Parliament and the King to respond.

The meat of that document begins like this:

***"do, in the first place, as Englishmen, their ancestors in like cases have usually done, for asserting and vindicating their rights and liberties, DECLARE,
That the inhabitants of the English colonies in North-America, by the immutable laws of nature, the principles of the English constitution, and the several charters or compacts, have the following RIGHTS:***

Resolved, N.C.D. 1. That they are entitled to life, liberty and property: and they have never ceded to any foreign power whatever, a right to dispose of either without their consent.

Resolved, N.C.D. 2. That our ancestors, who first settled these colonies, were at the time of their emigration from the mother country, entitled to all the rights, liberties, and immunities of free and natural- born subjects, within the realm of England.

Resolved, N.C.D. 3. That by such emigration they by no means forfeited, surrendered, or lost any of those rights, but that they were, and their descendants now are, entitled to the exercise and enjoyment of all such of them, as their local and other circumstances enable them to exercise and enjoy.

etc. (a total of 10 resolves)

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/resolves.htm

Note how they appeal to their HISTORICAL rights as Englishmen, echo the appeals of the English Bill of Rights and in their explanation of those "rights" COMBINE the universal principles (echoing Locke) with a whole series of specific civil and political rights they claim based on the HISTORY of English Constitutional law, their own experience with 'compacts', etc.

Note ESPECIALLY the paragraph I set off with asterisks (***), which appeals to ALL three - 'laws of nature', 'principles of the English constitution" and 'charters or compacts' - as the unified basis for their appeal.

Answer 2

finally! everybody is beginning up their eyes to be sure the actuality and the information displayed here communicate for themselves. After that super answer from gypsy_cat 345, i don't have lots to declare different than that individuals like Vanessa might desire to look on the bigger image and make her own checks, fairly than believing in what the media choose people to have self assurance. additionally, i do no longer think of people might desire to balme the Islamic faith for the movements of ignorant so-talked approximately as Muslims who declare they are appearing on its behalf. secondly, i do no longer think of Israel is purely a small united states that desires to be left on my own. If this grew to become into the case it does no longer have waged an entire-blown conflict on lebanon, killing hundreds of people with the intention to regain 2 of their squaddies who have been captured by making use of Hezbollah. shouldn't they think of roughly liberating the countless numbers of lebanese prisoners presently in Israel! Thirdly, Muslims don't have something against Jews. the priority is with the Zionists and Israelis. BTW, i'm no longer Lebanese. i'm purely asserting what i beleive is the actuality

Answer 3

England had tyrannical rule no represenative govt the power to put people in jail without charges, and the right to seize prooperty without cause. All these things are against what Americans beleived then and now.


Our freedom of speach our right to bear arms, all key.

Answer 4

John Locke had a major impact on it.