|
In political philosophy, the phrase consent of the governed refers to the idea that a government's legitimacy and moral right to use state power is only justified and legal when consented to by the people or society over which that political power is exercised. This theory of consent is historically contrasted to the divine right of kings and has often been invoked against the legitimacy of colonialism. Article 21 of the United Nation's 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that "The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government". ==History== In his book ''A History of Political Theory'', George Sabine collected the views of many political theorists on consent of the governed. He notes the idea mentioned in 1433 by Nicholas of Cusa in ''De Concordantia Catholica''. In 1579 Theodore Beza wrote ''Vindiciae contra Tyrannos'' which Sabine paraphrases: "The people lay down the conditions which the king is bound to fulfill. Hence they are bound to obedience only conditionally, namely, upon receiving the protection of just and lawful government…the power of the ruler is delegated by the people and continues only with their consent."〔George Sabine (1937) A History of Political Theory, Holt, Rinehart and Winston〕 In England, the Levellers also held to this principle of government. John Milton wrote :The power of kings and magistrates is nothing else, but what is only derivative, transferred and committed to them in trust from the people, to the common good of them all, in whom the power yet remains fundamentally, and cannot be taken from them, without a violation of their natural birthright.〔John Milton ''Works'' V: 10〕〔 Similarly, Sabine notes the position of John Locke in ''Essay concerning Human Understanding'': :(power ) can have no right except as this is derived from the individual right of each man to protect himself and his property. The legislative and executive power used by government to protect property is nothing except the natural power of each man resigned into the hands of the community…and it is justified merely because it is a better way of protecting natural right than the self-help to which each man is naturally entitled.〔 However, with David Hume a contrary voice is heard. Sabine interprets Hume's skepticism by noting :The political world over, absolute governments which do not even do lip-service to the fiction of consent are more common than free governments, and their subjects rarely question their right except when tyranny becomes too oppressive.〔 Sabine revived the concept from its status as a political myth after Hume, by referring to Thomas Hill Green. Green wrote that government required "will not force" for administration. As put by Sabine,〔 :Even the most powerful and the most despotic government cannot hold a society together by sheer force; to that extent there was a limited truth to the old belief that governments are produced by consent. Consent of the governed, within the social liberalism of T. H. Green, was also described by Paul Harris: :The conditions for the existence of a political society have less to do with force and fear of coercion than with the members’ mutual recognition of a good common to themselves and others, although it may not be consciously expressed as such. Thus for the conditions for any civil combination to disappear through resistance to a despotic government or disobedience to law would require such a disastrous upheaval as to be unlikely in all but the most extreme circumstances in which we might agree with Green that the price would be too high to pay, yet sufficiently rare to allow us to acknowledge that there would ordinarily be a moral duty to act to overthrow any state that did not pursue the common good.〔Paul Harris (1982) "Green’s theory of political obligation and disobedience", pp 127 to 142 in ''The Philosophy of T. H. Green'', Andrew Vincent editor, Gower Publishing, ISBN 0-566-05104-4〕 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Consent of the governed」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|