Similarities Between John Locke And Alan Blinder

John Locke and Alan Blinder build their arguments around the formation of a government that would maximize benefits for the American people. Although Locke and Blinder have two different arguments, they are not entirely contradictory. John Locke’s main argument for the ratification of the constitution was to control political factions from possibly gaining power. According to Locke, a representative form of government is necessary in protecting the majority from being silenced by a political minority. Alan Blinder would not disagree with Locke, a representative government is essential but government itself has become to politicized and resulted in short term thinking and estrangement from politicians. Blinders main belief is that it would be most beneficial for the country for congress to allocate some of its technical policy making power to nonpolitical agencies to achieve long term success. Both men are arguing two valid but different points, enacting Blinders proposal into the foundational government articulated by Locke would create an effective long term government. Maintaining a representative government is essential to ensure the values, morals, and wishes of the American people. However, allocating technical policy making power such creating a tax code, health care policy, and trade provisions to a nongovernmental agency with presidentially appointed experts would translate into the …show more content…
Neither John Locke nor Alan Blinder are incorrect in their ideology, Locke sets the foundation of an effective government and Blinder amends that government to best serve the current climate of politics in America. The extension of power from Congress to an independent body of specialists in a bipartisan climate