Early political theorists made many attempts to reconcile the concepts of rights and equality within the framework of political thought and ideals. Differing points of view on these subjects existed among the many political philosophers and theorists. One view was that the early theorists were engaged in an impossible task when they sought to accommodate the concepts of rights and equality with the requirements of civil order. Another view held that some theorists believed that rights were, by their very nature, a demand for limited government. The concept of rights elevates, as an absolute, a few values or interests while denying the legitimacy of any governmental interference. Total equality, however, would deny any constraint or exception to majority rule if it were the law of the land.
Abstract terms, such as rights and equality, were a consuming passion among some political theorists who were expounding their philosophies in the 1600s and 1700s. Given the premise that the values associated with rights and equality were considered incompatible, rights and equality were rendered incongruous with requirements of an orderly society by some theorists. In practice, rights and equality could negate social order in the name of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
Four prominent theorists of the 1600s and 1700s--Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, Thomas Paine, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau--will be compared. They were relatively successful in reconciling equality and rights with each other and with the requirements of an orderly society. Each writerÆs approach was unique. The following works will be used: Leviathan by Thomas Hobbes; ôThe Second Treatise of Governmentö from Political Writings by John Locke; ôCommon Senseö and ôThe Rights of Manö from Common Sense, The Rights of Man, and Other Essential Writings by Thomas Paine; and The Social Contract and Discourse on the Origin of Inequality by Jean-Jacques Rouss...