The chief effect of the Enlightenment on the colonies was to provide an ideological framework that justified their rebellion and independence from British rule.
The Enlightenment placed rational thought ahead of tradition and superstition. This kind of rational thinking was applied to government, as well as to other aspects of life. Writers, especially the Enlightenment philosopher John Locke in his Second Treatise of Government, insisted that a monarch ruled by the consent of the governed. This was actually a radical idea at the time. Traditionally, rule was seen as part of a top-down "great chain of being" initiated by God. God decided what was what, including who should rule, and people were expected to accept whatever king they were given. If the king was a tyrant, that was acceptable, as it was God's way of punishing the people for whatever misdeeds they might have done.
Locke said that theory was inaccurate and that a king could forfeit his right to reign by behaving badly and violating moral law. God had infused the world with "natural laws," which were innate, God-given rights that all (at least, all white and male) humans possessed. If a king violated the natural rights of men, it was legitimate for the people to rebel and overthrow him.
We can easily see how this helped in the colonial period at the time of heightened tensions leading to the American Revolution. The Americans claimed natural law gave them the right to depose of King George III—this is why documents, such as the Declaration of Independence, are so insistent on calling him a tyrant and listing his abuses.
Every revolution needs to justify itself if it has any hope of succeeding, and the Enlightenment gave the colonists the justifications they needed.
No comments:
Post a Comment