Diritti, legge e resistenza vs violenza ed anarchia nel pensiero politico liberale di John Locke

In Two Treatises of Government John Locke argues that the political sovereignty belongs to citizens and clarifies the legitimacy of government in terms of natural rights, natural law and social contract. By tracing part of the historiographic debate, I put forth an interpretation that differs from those which since Strauss consider Locke a follower of Hobbes’ political thought or even a masked Hobbesian thinker. From Locke’s standpoint, it is important to tell the legitimate from the illegitimate actions, functions and use of force of institutions. This is a basic point of Locke’s political thought, because the question about the legitimacy of government is connected to the question about the manner and the extent to which the individuals, as a society, can or must act to thwart cases of manifest illegitimacy of the institutions, even though they stem from social contract. I show that the right of revolution is not an incitement to violence and anarchy, rather it is consistent with the view that the sine qua non condition of civil government is the respect of natural rights and natural law, on whose grounds the government may arise with the consent of all those who take part in it.