Analysis on How John Locke’s Philosophies Inspired Simon Bolivar to Fight for Venezuela’s Freedom

Simon Bolivar is a Creole that grew up in a wealthy family. Bolivar dedicated his time and effort to fighting for the independence of Venezuela from Spain. In order to do this Bolivar was inspired by the enlightenment ideas of John Locke. John Locke explains the State of Nature that people are in. The State of Nature is when people are able to do as they please without the control of a government. However, his enlightenment ideas state that people have to follow governmental rules and regulations in order to stay safe under law, but they have to follow the people's needs.

According to John Locke, if the government is not living up to what the people asked for and demanded, the people of society have the ability to overthrow the government and gain back their political control. The Creoles and other people of society struggle to gain independence and freedom from their Spanish governments, but Locke’s enlightenment ideas helps them better understand their do’s and don'ts of being ruled by a government. “We have already seen the light, and it is not our desire to thrust back into the darkness...” (bolivar)Simon Bolivar discusses the situation the Creoles are in with the spaniards. He describes how the Creoles have been able to see freedom in the past and they almost reached it. However, they’re being stopped from reaching their goal to attain freedom and peace from the Spaniards. “... whenever the legislators endeavor to take away and destroy the property of the people, or to reduce them to slavery under arbitrary power, they put themselves into a state of war with the people.” (Locke, 2). Here John Locke explains what the people are eligible to do when the government does not fulfill its duties to the people. If the government attempts to take and ruin the property of their people, society had the ability to overthrow the government because their natural rights are not being upheld and there is no compromise between the people and government. Therefore, both Bolivar and Locke have the same ideas when it comes to governmental control. They both understand what could happen if the government does not fulfill the people’s natural rights and the consequences that could be obtained with that.

On the other hand, Bolivar reveals the idea of how the Creoles are cut off from all and any sources from outside of their lands, but Locke sends out the idea that there is a way getting outside material and communication.The Creoles had major difficulty “As I have just explained, we were cut off and, as it were removed from the world in relation to the science of government and administration of the state,” (Bolivar, 4). The Creoles had no way of being able to be part of the Spanish government, nor had the ability to participate in trades. The Spaniards had blocked off any communication that the Creoles could possibly have to attempt to get at. Also, they could not have the ability to be merchants or even traders because Spain was so greedy. They kept all of their attention on the creoles way of working, but never their desirable needs. Therefore, Bolivar emerchants or even traders because Spain was so greedy. They kept all of their attention on the creoles way of working, but never their desirable needs. Therefore, Bolivar expands on the idea of expands on the idea of how the Creoles were mistreated even in governmental areas. Locke states, “... no one can be put out of this estate and subjected to the political power of another without his own consent” (Locke, 6). In this writing here Locke is describing that the people have their decision in being part of the governmental control. People have a say whether they would like the protection or not. Even though the government can try to take away the people’s consent

On that note, Bolivar and Locke are different in ways of thinking about governmental issues. Bolivar indicated the Spanish government was there to hurt the creoles, but Locke reveals that the government should be there to secure them and keep them safe. As Bolivar talked about the harsh treatment from the Spanish government he does not miss a detail, so it can get across to the reader. “We are threatened with the fear of death, dishonor, and every harm; there is nothing we have not suffered at the hands of that unnatural stepmother- Spain,” (Bolivar, 3). Instead of protecting the Creoles the Spanish government is actually put them in all harm possible. The creoles called the Spanish government the “stepmother” for the reasoning that they are treating the creoles so harshly. As the government begins to flourish and not positively, the creoles become more upset. It causes them to be more afraid of the government’s next move, which could possibly be life threatening. On the other hand, Locke indicated that the government should be upholding all rights of the people and keeping them safe from all harm because the people put their trust and freedom into the governmental hands. “... and putting themselves under government, is the preservation of their property; to which in the state of Nature there are many things wanting,” (Locke, 13). If the creoles were to put their rights into the hands of the government, they were giving them power. However, the government did not have complete and utter control of the people because they were used for protection against other countries and safety of their properties. Also Locke says, “The reason why men enter into a social contract is the preservation of their property; and the end while they choose and authorise a legislative is that there may be laws made and rules set as guards and fences to the properties of all society” (Locke, 15). If people were part of the social contract then they gave the government their rights then they would have a lot of control over what the laws looked like and who would be part of that government. Therefore, Bolivar and Locke are different due to different views of how the government works and how it contributes to its people.