Suchergebnisse

Replies to a critique by Seymour Drescher in which he suggests that the author failed to consider the possibility that Locke accepted a 'market legitimation' for Afro-American slavery. (JLN)

THE AUTHOR ANALYZES JOHN LOCKE'S APPARENTLY CONFLICTING POLITICAL VIEWS ABOUT POLITICAL FREEDOM AND SLAVERY. HE DESCRIBES LOCKE AS BEING AN INTENSE ADVOCATE OF UNIVERSAL HUMAN RIGHTS, YET HE SUPPORTED LEGISLATION TO GIVE FREEMEN ABSOLUTE POWER OVER NEGRO SLAVES. ATTEMPTS OF OTHERS TO EXPLAIN AND RECONCILE THESE APPARENT INCONSISTENCIES ARE DESCRIBED AND EVALUATED.

IN THIS ARTICLE, JOHN DRYZEK AND STEPHEN LEONARD DEFEND THEIR EARLIER ESSAY EMPHASIZING THE NEED FOR CONTEXT-SENSITIVE HISTORIES OF THE DISCIPLINE OF POLITICAL SCIENCE. IN THEIR VIEW, DISCIPLINARY HISTORY MUST GUIDE PRACTICAL INQUIRY IF IT IS TO BE MOST USEFUL. JAMES FARR, JOHN GUNNELL, AND RAYMOND SEIDELMAN CRITIQUE THE ARGUMENT PRESENTED BY DRYZEK AND LEONARD.