More so than perhaps any other single political philosopher, John Locke's vision of government was enacted as the founding fathers of America drew from Lockeian ideals when writing the Constitution. It is slightly ironic, then, that the country that Locke's views helped shaped was the land that grounded many of his arguments within the Second Treatise of Government. Using America as a reference point, Locke was able to make a cohesive argument for the state of human nature and the definition of property. It is with these two concepts a priori that Locke is able to argue that the role of government is to protect people's personal property and that, ultimately, it is in the public's best interest. I argue that having the New World available at the time of his theories gave Locke a focus for his ideal model; a world ripe with God's gifts but lacking human resources. While looking at America in terms of this instrumental value may have been a solid foundation for his model, I contend that his view is also dependent on the idea that there is always a place in which to expand. Though this may have seemed true in Locke's time, it has since been proven largely inaccurate. Had Locke based his stance within the bounds of England, there would not be an undertone to his work of limitless accumulation, which the discovery of America allowed him to believe. Since much of this country's Constitution is steeped in Lockeian ideals, the undercurrents of this mentality still exist in modern thought. This results in the political structure of America being devastatingly ill equipped to deal with environmental troubles in terms of resource management.
Much of Locke's theories are rooted in his assumed state of nature. Instead o ...