Filtering by
The influence of John Locke’s political philosophy on Thomas Jefferson is well-documented, from their shared belief in natural rights to their similar theories of property to their shared support of religious freedom. As one of Jefferson’s “three greatest men,” Locke’s influence cannot be understated. The influence of Baron de Montesquieu is far more contested, but nonetheless Jefferson’s close study of Montesquieu and their shared belief in the character of republics and the necessity of education, among other things, provide clear evidence for Montesquieu’s influence. I propose that the dissonance between Montesquieu’s ideas and Jefferson’s adaptation and application of them result from Jefferson’s Lockean lens: a framework based on Locke’s ideas that so profoundly impacted Jefferson’s beliefs that he molded other philosopher’s ideas to conform to Locke. By analyzing the political writings of Locke, Montesquieu, and Jefferson, as well as some of Jefferson’s personal writing (in the form of letters and his Literary Commonplace Book) the influence of both philosophers and the framework Locke provides can be established. Understanding this framework helps us better understand the philosophical foundations of Thomas Jefferson’s politics, and by extension understand the philosophical foundations of American political thought.
These two men could not have had more different upbringings; Thomas Jefferson was born to a wealthy family that owned land and slaves, whereas Alexander Hamilton was born on a Caribbean island in poverty, only to be orphaned early on in his life . Despite these differences both men found a common goal in fighting for independence for the American colonies. Jefferson would do so as a diplomat and author of the Declaration of Independence, Hamilton would be a patriot through being a soldier and assistant to General George Washington. Once the war was over, the two continued their service to the country and would find themselves as the first heads of the United States’ cabinet departments. By being in Washington’s cabinet, the two came in conflict with one another frequently on the policy of the time such as the country’s neutrality in foreign affairs. No issue put them more in conflict than their stances on the country’s economic state.
This thesis utilizes an examination of examples of laws designed to control misinformation, past and present, then using those examples to provide context to both arguments in favor of and opposing new misinformation laws. Extensive archival research was conducted to ensure that accurate historical reflection could be included in offering information about historical examples, as well as through application of relevant literature. The possible effects on the electorate and the practices of the press by those laws of the past and potential proposals for new legislation are also discussed in an effort to provide further context to, and support for, the conclusions reached. Those conclusions include that additional regulation is necessary to discourage the creation and distribution of fake news and misinformation in order to protect the public from the violence or imminent unlawful action they may cause.