Desire and education: Locke's use of consent

John Locke teaches at once that government is necessary because the greater part of mankind are not strict observers of equity and justice, and that the remedy for this inconvenience must be found in the consent of these people. In some way the people must be brought to consent to what is just. Locke distinguishes between men who are free, and men who "act like free men." Only the former are genuinely "capable," in Locke's terms, of consent. Locke implies that a small group of citizens best understands the law of reason. Such political wisdom does not carry special political rights. Both as a matter of right (because rights are held equally and men are naturally free) and as a matter of prudence (because ignoring the strongest desires of the people is foolish) governors must attend to the consent of the governed. Freedom becomes their method of governance, and they (or more likely other workmen) will build a citizenry which behaves as though it is capable of that freedom. At Locke's direction they accomplish this through a combination of popular legislative elections and quiet executive prerogative. In doing so they ensure the stability of their rule, and the strength of their nation. But such liberty and consent has been transformed into an instrument (and perhaps a mere instrument) of governance. Because prerogative acts without consent, or precedes consent, it is a power without a political right and must be used discreetly. Such prerogative is aimed at producing citizens who are accustomed to self-government, people who though they are not fully capable of reason and freedom, behave as though they are. If Locke is genuinely committed to a teaching of individual rights and consent then we may rightly ask whether his program, with its "gloss" and "show" of liberty and equality, accomplishes that ideal; or whether in the end Lockean society makes an approach to a justice which we can never in practice attain.