SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Adam Akademi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 16 Sayı: 2

The Paradox of Slavery in John Locke's Liberal Thought

John Locke'un Liberal Düşüncesinde Kölelik Paradoksu

Sibel Fügan Varol0000-0003-3234-2518
Pages
535–562
Publication Date
2026-08-07
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Rather, it should be understood in light of the philosopher’s historical circumstances, material interests, and broader political biography.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The inconsistency between John Locke’s liberal ideas and his views on slavery has been the subject of extensive scholarly debate over the past two to three decades.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Central to these debates are Locke’s theory of slavery within the framework of just war and the harsh provisions on slavery contained in the Fundamental Constitutions of Carolina, a document to which he is widely believed to have made a significant contribution, even if he was not its sole author.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Rather, it should be understood in light of the philosopher’s historical circumstances, material interests, and broader political biography.
🔬Design:Derleme
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:John Locke · Kölelik · Liberalizm

Abstract

The inconsistency between John Locke’s liberal ideas and his views on slavery has been the subject of extensive scholarly debate over the past two to three decades. Central to these debates are Locke’s theory of slavery within the framework of just war and the harsh provisions on slavery contained in the Fundamental Constitutions of Carolina, a document to which he is widely believed to have made a significant contribution, even if he was not its sole author. In both contexts, Locke granted slave owners “absolute power and authority” over their slaves, including the right to take their lives without justification. This position has been widely regarded as fundamentally inconsistent with the liberal principles of natural rights, freedom, and equality that he defended. It is difficult to deny that this inconsistency was shaped by Locke’s active involvement in England’s colonial administration, his financial interests in the slave trade, and the influence of Anthony Ashley Cooper, the Earl of Shaftesbury, who served as his patron for much of his life and whose interests were closely tied to the American colonies. Accordingly, this study argues that the tension between Locke’s liberal philosophy and his defence of slavery cannot be attributed to intellectual oversight, inconsistency, or error. Rather, it should be understood in light of the philosopher’s historical circumstances, material interests, and broader political biography.

Özet

Liberal düşüncenin babası sayılan Locke'un özgürlükçü düşünceleriyle köleliğe yönelik tezleri arasındaki tutarsızlık son yirmi otuz yıldır kapsamlı olarak tartışılmaktadır. Bu tartışmaların odağında, düşünürün haklı savaş kapsamında geliştirdiği kölelik teorisinin yanı sıra kendisi yazmamış olsa bile en azından önemli bir katkısının olduğu düşünülen Carolina Temel Anayasaları'nda yer alan sert ifadeler bulunmaktadır. Her iki kölelik türünde de köle sahibine kölesi üzerinde "mutlak güç ve otorite" uygulama, hatta mazerete gerek kalmadan canını alabilme yetkisi tanımış olması düşünürün savunduğu doğal haklar, özgürlük, eşitlik gibi liberal ilkelerle açık bir tutarsızlık olarak kabul edilmektedir. Bu tutarsızlıkta düşünürün İngiltere'nin sömürge faaliyetlerinde aktif rol almış olmasının, köle ticaretine yaptığı yatırımların ve ömrünün büyük bir kısmında hamiliğini yapan Shaftesbury Lordu Ashton Cooper'ın Amerikan yerleşkelerindeki çıkarlarının etkisinin olmadığı düşünülemez. Dolayısıyla, Locke'un özgürlükçü düşünceleriyle köleliğe yönelik tutumu arasındaki tutarsızlığın bir tür bilinç bölünmesi, ihmal veya hatadan kaynaklanmadığını, düşünürün kendi somut şartlarıyla, maddi çıkarlarıyla ve bir bütün olarak biyografisiyle bağlantılı olduğunu söylemek mümkündür.

🔖

Cite This Article

Varol, S. F. (2026). The Paradox of Slavery in John Locke's Liberal Thought. Adam Akademi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, Cilt: 16 Sayı: 2, 535–562. https://doi.org/10.31679/adamakademi.1612336

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (47)

  1. Addison, K. N. (2009). “We Hold These Truths to Be Self-Evident.” An Interdisciplinary Analysis of the Roots of Racism and Slavery in America. New York: University Press of America, Inc.
  2. Alston, R. (2011). The Good Master: Pliny, Hobbes, and the Nature of Freedom. In R. Alston, E. Hall, & J. McConnell (Eds.), Ancient Slavery and Abolition: From Hobbes to Hollywood (pp. 41-64). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  3. Armitage, D. (2004). John Locke, Carolina, and the Two Treatises of Government. Political Theory, 32, 602-627.
  4. Armitage, D. (2012). John Locke: Theorist of empire? In S. Muthu (Ed.). Empire and Modern Political Thought (pp. 84-111). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  5. Arneil, B. (1994). Trade, Plantations, and Property: John Locke and the Economic Defense of Colonialism. Journal of the History of Ideas, 55(4), 591–609.
  6. Arneil, B. (1996). John Locke and America: The Defence of English Colonialism. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  7. Bernal, M. (1998). Kara Atena: Eski Yunanistan Uydurmacası Nasıl İmal Edildi? 1785- 1985 (Ö. Buze, Çev.). İstanbul: Kaynak Yayınları.
  8. Bernasconi, R. (2011). Irk Kavramını Kim İcat Etti? Felsefi Düşüncede Irk ve Irkçılık (3. bs.) (Z. Direk, İ. Esiner, T. Meriç ve N. Ökten, Çev.). İstanbul: Metis Yayınları.
  9. Bernasconi, R. & Mann, A. M. (2005). The Contradictions of Racism: Locke, Slavery, and the Two Treatises. In A. Valls (Ed.). Race and Racism in Modern Philosophy (pp. 89-107). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
  10. Beutler, K. T. (1999). "Let Justice be done though the Heavens Fall!": Emancipation Cases in the Early American Republic, 1781-1806, Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, ABD.
  11. Blackburn, R. (1997). The Making of New World Slavery, From the Baroque to the Modern, 1492-1800. New York: Verso.
  12. Bourbouri, K., Nowzari, H. A. & Shirzadi, R. (2021). A Comparative Glance at Thomas Hobbes and John Locke's Ideas on the Concept of Freedom. International Journal of Political Science, 11(4), 71-92.
  13. Brendese, P. J. (2023). Segregated Time. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  14. Corcoran, P. (2018): John Locke on Native Right, Colonial Possession, and the Concept of Vacuum Domicilium. The European Legacy, 23(3):225-250 DOI: 10.1080/10848770.2017.1416766.
  15. Cundiff, C. (2021). Slavery in Thought and Action: Reconciling the Duality of John Locke, Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Arizona State University, Arizona, ABD.
  16. Çapar, S. ve Yıldırım, Ş. (2012). Hobbes ve Locke’un Devlet Düşüncesine Katkıları. Türk İdare Dergisi, 474, 77-102.
  17. Farr, J. (2008). Locke, Natural Law and New World Slavery. Political Theory, 36(4), 495–522.
  18. Farr, J. (1986). “So Vile and Miserable an Estate”: The Problem of Slavery in Locke’s Political Thought. Political Theory, (14)2, 263–89.
  19. Goldie, M. (2016). Locke’s Life. In M. Stuart (Ed.). A Companion to Locke (pp. 27-44). West Sussex: Wiley Blackwell Publishing.
  20. Harpham, J. S. (2019). The Intellectual Origins of American Slavery, Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi, Harvard University, Cambridge, ABD.
  21. Heywood, A. (2013). Siyasi İdeolojiler: Bir Giriş (5. bs.) (A. K. Bayram, Ö. Tüfekçi, H. İnaç, Ş. Akın, B. Kalkan, Çev.). Ankara: Adres Yayınları.
  22. Hinshelwood, B. (2013). The Carolinian Context of John Locke’s Theory of Slavery. Political Theory, (41)4, 562–90.
  23. İnce, O. U. (2013). Colonial Capitalism and the Dilemmas of Liberalism: Locke, Burke, Wakefield and the British Empire. Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi, Cornell University, Ithaca, ABD.
  24. Juhansar, A. L. (2021). John Locke: The Construction of Knowledge in the Perspective of Philosophy. Jurnal Filsafat Indonesia, 4(3), 254–260.
  25. Karenga, M. (1985). Political Culture and Resurgent Racism in the United States. The Black Scholar, 16(3), 21–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/00064246.1985.11414339.
  26. Kolia, Z. (2015). Colonial Theology: John Locke, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Charles Darwin and the Emergence of the Colonial-Capitalist World System, 1500-1900. Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi, York Üniversitesi, York, İngiltere.
  27. Letwiniuk, T. (1998). John Locke: The Devonshire farmer and the disposession of the Amerindians of Belize and Guyana. Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi. University of Toronto, Toronto, Kanada.
  28. Locke, J. (2012). Yönetim Üzerine İki İnceleme: Sivil Yönetimin Gerçek Kökeni, Boyutu ve Amacı Üzerine Bir Deneme (2. Baskı) (F. Bakırcı, Çev.). Ankara: Ebabil Yayınları.
  29. Locke, J. (2015). Two Treatises of Government. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  30. Locke J. (1996). İnsan Anlığı Üzerine Bir Deneme. (V. Hacıkadiroğlu, Çev.). İstanbul: Kabalcı.
  31. Losurdo, D. (2011). Liberalism: A Counter-History. (G. Elliott, Çev.). London: Verso.
  32. Malcolm, N. (1981). Hobbes, Sandys, and the Virginia Company. Historical Journal, 24(2), 297–321.
  33. Maris, C. W. (2020). Philosophical Racism and Ubuntu: In Dialogue with Mogobe Ramose. South African Journal of Philosophy, 39(3), 308-326. DOI: 10.1080/02580136.2020.1809124
  34. Neiges Léonard, M. (2022). Racial Diversity in Racial Diversity in Contemporary France: The Case of Colorblindness. Bristol: Bristol University Press.
  35. Nyquist, M. (2009). Hobbes, Slavery, and Despotical Rule. Representations, 106(1), 1–33.
  36. Powell, J. (2008). Greatest Emancipations: How the West Abolished Slavery. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
  37. Price, B. (1997). "The Language, Of The Traffic": Colonial Slavery And Political Discourse in the Late Eighteenth Century, Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi, The University Of York, York, İngiltere.
  38. Smith, L. G. & Smith, J. K. (1999). Lives in Education: A Narrative of People and Ideas (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  39. Sosman, D. A. E. (2017). Liberty: The Role of an Idea in Two Revolutions. University of Glasgow. Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
  40. Stevenson, A. (2017). The “Great Doctrine of Human Rights”: Articulation and Authentication in the Nineteenth-Century U.S. Antislavery and Women’s Rights Movements. Humanity, 8(3), 413-439.
  41. Şahin, B. (2015). Liberalizm. Dünyada ve Türkiye'de Siyasal İdeolojiler. Ö. Çaha ve B. Şahin (Ed.) içinde (ss. 39-102). Ankara: Orion Kitabevi.
  42. Tabanlı, F. (2019). Thomas Hobbes ve John Locke’un Devletin Kökeni Hakkındaki Görüşleri. Anadolu Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, 4(2), 331-353.
  43. Tully, J. (1993). An Approach to Political Philosophy: Locke in Contexts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  44. Ward, L. (2010). John Locke and Modern Life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  45. Welchman, J. L. (1995). Locke On Slavery And Inalienable Rights. Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 25(1), 67-81.
  46. Wootton, D. (2003) Introduction. In D. Wootton (Ed), John Locke: Political Writings (pp. 7-122). Indianapolis, USA: Hackett Publishing Co.
  47. Addison, K. N. (2009). “We Hold These Truths to Be Self-Evident.” An Interdisciplinary Analysis of the Roots of Racism and Slavery in America. New York: University Press of America, Inc.