Second Treatise of Government: Chapter 19: Of the Dissolution of Government Summary & Analysis

Whoever speaks of the dissolution of government, should know the difference between the dissolution of society and the dissolution of government, Locke says. The only way in which a society—that being the union people consent to in order to exit the state of nature—can be dissolved is through foreign conquest. Whenever a society is dissolved, a government cannot stand. However, Locke argues, governments can also be dissolved from within, and one way is when the legislative is altered. When the legislative is broken or dissolved, the government cannot stand. 

Whenever unjust laws are imposed on a common-wealth, the people are under no obligation to obey them, Locke claims. If a prince or king applies arbitrary rule to his people, the legislative is thereby altered, effectively dissolving the government. If a prince or king prohibits the legislative from assembling as scheduled, the legislative is altered and government dissolved. When the arbitrary power of the king or prince is altered without consent or common interest of the people, the legislative is altered, and the government is dissolved. Lastly, if the prince, king, or magistrate subjects the people to a foreign power, the legislative is altered, and the government is once again dissolved.

A government may also be dissolved when a supreme executive abandons their rule and laws cannot be put into action. This reduces a common-wealth to anarchy and effectively dissolves the government, Locke contends. In any case when the government is dissolved, the people have the right to build a new government, as a society can never lose the right to preserve itself. A government is again dissolved when the legislative or prince acts in a way that is contrary to the common-wealth’s interest, such as invading personal property or infringing on the people’s lives. When this happens, the legislative puts themselves in a state of war with the common-wealth, and the people have a right to resist as they see fit.  

While some may surely say that no government can exist if the people are able to resist, Locke says this isn’t necessarily true. People are set in their ways and hesitant to adopt new forms of government. Others say the right to resist leads to general rebellion, but Locke again disagrees. Rebellions and revolutions don’t occur for “every little mismanagement in public affairs.” The right to resist is the best defense against rebellion, as it is legislators who act contrary to the people that are guilty of rebellion, Locke says. 

The common question, Locke says, is who is the judge of deciding if the legislative has acted against the people? Locke claims the people are the best judges in such circumstances. In conclusion, Locke states the power that each individual gave to the common-wealth cannot revert back to the people as long as the society stands but must always remains with the community, as without this power there can be no common-wealth. Whenever power is forfeited by the government, the people have the right to reign supreme and govern themselves until they build a new government to replace the old.