John Locke: Hero or Hypocrite?

I’ve always admired John Locke. His ideas about liberty, reason, and government by consent shaped modern democracy and inspired revolutions. He’s often called the “Father of Liberalism,” and for good reason — his theories underpinned the American and French Revolutions. But the more I’ve read about him, the more I’ve wondered: was Locke really the hero we think he was?

The truth, as always, is complicated.

Did Locke Really Believe in Equality?

Locke’s Two Treatises of Government laid the philosophical groundwork for individual rights and limited government. He argued that all people have natural rights to life, liberty, and property — and that governments exist to protect those rights or else lose their legitimacy.

But here’s the problem: Locke invested heavily in the slave trade. He was a shareholder in the Royal African Company, which trafficked thousands of enslaved Africans to the colonies. He also helped draft the Fundamental Constitutions of Carolina, a document that explicitly protected the right to enslave others. So how do we reconcile his lofty ideals with his participation in human bondage?

Was Locke a Champion of Religious Tolerance?

Locke’s Letter Concerning Toleration is often cited as a foundational text for secularism and religious freedom. He argued that the state shouldn’t enforce religious belief and that people should be free to worship as they choose — a radical idea in the 17th century.

Yet, in that same letter, Locke excluded Catholics and atheists from his vision of tolerance. He feared Catholics owed allegiance to a foreign power (the Pope), and he believed atheists couldn’t be trusted because they didn’t believe in divine judgment. That’s not universal tolerance — it’s tolerance with a gatekeeper.

How Did Locke Influence Colonialism?

Many don’t realize that Locke’s philosophical justifications for property rights were used to support colonial expansion. In his Second Treatise, he argued that land becomes private property when someone “mixes their labor” with it. That idea was later used to justify European settlers taking land from Indigenous peoples, claiming that the land was unused or “wasted” because it wasn’t being farmed in the European style.

Was Locke directly responsible for colonial dispossession? No. But his ideas were weaponized to justify it — and that raises questions about how we interpret his legacy.

What About His Role in Government?

Locke served as a secretary to the Earl of Shaftesbury and was deeply involved in colonial policy. He helped draft legal frameworks that entrenched hierarchy and exclusion. The Carolina constitutions he co-wrote created a hereditary nobility and gave masters nearly absolute power over servants and enslaved people.

These weren’t incidental roles — Locke helped shape the very systems he’s now credited with reforming. His political writings may have inspired liberty for some, but they also codified oppression for many others.

So Was Locke a Hero?

I used to think the answer was simple: yes. His ideas were revolutionary. They inspired people to fight for freedom and dignity. But now I see him as a man of his time — brilliant, yes, but flawed in ways that had real consequences.

We don’t have to erase Locke to understand him. We can admire his contributions to political thought while acknowledging the contradictions in his life. That’s the only way to build a more honest history — and a better future.

If you're curious how Locke might defend his own views today, you can talk to him directly on HoloDream. Ask him about his role in colonial policy, or challenge him on his stance toward slavery. You might come away with more questions than answers — but that’s where real understanding begins.