Liberalizmin Kayıp Çocukları: Leveller Hareketi İncelemesi

Year 2024, Volume: 79 Issue: 4, 775 - 798, 12.12.2024

Gökhan Çelen

https://doi.org/10.33630/ausbf.1375449

Abstract

Bu çalışma liberalizme dair incelemelerde göz ardı edilen Leveller hareketi incelemesine odaklanmaktadır. Leveller hareketi İngiliz İç Savaşlarında kaleme aldıkları metinlerle krallık iktidarına karşı İngiliz tebaasının temel haklarını kazanmak için mücadele etmiştir. Üç anayasa taslağı hazırlayarak İngiliz temsilcilere anayasa önerileri sunmuşlar ve bireylerin hak ve özgürlüklerini anayasal güvence altına almaya çalışmışlardır. Leveller yazarlar özgür doğmuş İngiliz erkeklerinin doğal haklarını temel alarak özgür doğmuş erkeklere oy hakkı talep etmişlerdir. Krallık iktidarı tarafından gerçekleştirilen mülkiyet haklarına ilişkin usulsüzlüklere ve ticari imtiyazlara karşı koymuşlardır. Modern liberal devletin temel ilkeleri sayılan halkın egemenliği, parlamentonun üstünlüğü, güçler ayrılığı ve hukukun üstünlüğü, hukuk önünde eşitlik, adil yargılanma vb. ilkeleri savunularının temel direkleri haline getirerek liberal parlamenter sistemin düşünsel mimarlığını yapmışlardır. Tarihsel olarak John Locke’dan erken bir tarihe konumlanmalarına ve Locke’un teorisine benzer iddialarda bulunmalarına karşın siyasi düşünce tarihi incelemelerinde bilinçli ya da bilinçsiz olarak göz ardı edilmektedirler. Bu görmezden gelme durumu ise Leveller hareketinin marjinalleştirilmesine yol açmaktadır. Bu çalışmada Leveller hareketinin siyasal teorisi kaleme aldıkları metinler üzerinden içerik analizi yöntemiyle incelenerek ve Locke’un teorisiyle karşılaştırılarak liberalizmin tarihindeki konumlarının belirlenmesi amaçlanmaktadır. Leveller düşüncesinin ortaya çıkışı ve felsefi temelleri incelenerek doğal hak, siyasal hak ve mülkiyet hakkına ilişkin düşünceleri aktarılmıştır. Bu çalışmanın iddiası klasik liberalizmin Leveller hareketi ile başlatılabileceğidir.

Keywords

Doğal hak, Leveller hareketi, Liberalizm, Mülkiyet hakkı, Siyasal hak

The Lost Children of Liberalism: A Study of the Leveller Movement

Abstract

The primary objective of this work is to conduct an analysis of the Leveller movement, a topic that is frequently neglected in scholarly examinations of liberalism. The Leveller movement played an active role during the English Civil War, as evidenced by their establishment of political texts and their involvement in the New Model Army. In an effort to protect the rights and liberties of individuals, the proponents endeavoured to establish a written constitution proposal to be presented to the British government, undertaking the task of preparing three versions. Leveller leaders that spearheaded the movement encompassed John Lilburne, Richard Overton, William Walwyn, and John Wildman. The Leveller movement advocated for the universal suffrage of all freeborn British men, grounded in natural rights. The individuals in question exhibited opposition to the irregularities in property rights and business concessions that were being enforced by the monarchy. The fundamental tenets of the contemporary liberal state encompass the concepts of popular sovereignty, the supreme authority of the legislative body, the division of powers, adherence to legal principles, equality before the law, and the provision of a just trial, among others. The intellectual architects of the liberal parliamentary system constructed its intellectual framework by establishing the principles as the foundational elements of their defence. The historical positioning of their works prior to those of Thomas Hobbes and John Locke is frequently overlooked in scholarly analyses of the history of political philosophy. This lack of attention often results in their marginalisation within academic discussions. The primary objective of this study is to ascertain the historical significance of the Leveller movement within the context of liberalism. This will be achieved by conducting a content analysis of the political ideology espoused by the Leveller movement, as documented in their written texts. The claim of this study is that the beginning of classical liberalism can be traced to the Leveller movement.

Keywords

Individual, Levellers, Liberalism, Natural Right, Political Right, Property Right

References

• Baker, Philip (2012), "The Levellers, Decentralisation and the Agreements of the People", Baker, Philip ve Elliot Vernon (Der.), The Agreements of the People, the Levellers and the Constitutional Crisis of the English Revolution (London: Palgrave Macmillan): 97–116.
• Bejan, Teresa M. (2022), "What Was the Point of Equality?", American Journal of Political Science, 66 (3): 604–616.
• Bell, Duncan (2014), "What is Liberalism?", Political Theory, 42 (6): 682–715.
• Braddick, Michael (2018), The Common Freedom of the People John Lilburne and the English Revolution (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
• Brocker, Manfred (2009), "Suffrage and Democracy in the Political Philosophy of John Locke", Interpretation - Journal of Political Philosophy, 37 (1): 29–46.
• Cohen, Joshua (1986), "Structure, Choice, and Legitimacy: Locke’s Theory of the State", Philosophy & Public Affairs, 15 (4): 301–324.
• Conway, David (2008), "Liberalism, Classical" Hamowy, Ronald (Der.), The Encyclopedia of Libertarianism (Los Angeles: Sage Publications): 295–298.
• De Krey, Gary S. (2017), Following the Levellers, Volume One Political and Religious Radicals in the English Civil War and Revolution, 1645-1649 (London: Palgrave Macmillan).
• Filmer, Robert (1949), Patriarcha and Other Political Works of Sir Robert Filmer Laslett, Peter (Der.), (Oxford: Basil Blackwell).
• Foxley, Rachel (2004), "John Lilburne and the Citizenship of ‘Free-Born Englishmen’", The Historical Journal, 47 (4): 849–874.
• Foxley, Rachel (2012), "Freedom of Conscience and the Aggrements of the People", Baker, Philip ve Elliot Vernon (Der.), The Agreements of the People, the Levellers and the Constitutional Crisis of the English Revolution (New York: Palgrave Macmillan): 37–39.
• Gentles, Ian (2022), The New Model Army: Agent of Revolution, (London: Yale University Press). Hampsher-Monk, Iain (1975), "The Political Theory of the Levellers: Putney, Property and Professor Macpherson", Political Studies, XXIV (4): 397–422.
• Heywood, Andrew (2014), Siyasi İdeolojiler (Ankara: Adres Yayınları) (Çev. Ahmet Kemal Bayram, Özgür Tüfekçi, Hüsamettin İnaç, Şeyma Akın ve Buğra Kalkan).
• Higgs, Robert ve Carl P. Close, (Der.) (2006), The Challenge of Liberty Classical Liberalism Today, (California: The Independent Institute).
• Howell, Roger ve David E. Brewster, (1970), "Reconsidering the Levellers: The Evidence of the Moderate", Past & Present, 46 (1): 68–86.
• Hughes, Martin (1990), "Locke on Taxation and Suffrage", History of Political Thought, 11 (3): 423–442.
• Kennedy, Donald E. (2000), The English Revolution 1642 – 1649 (London: Macmillan Press).
• Kennedy, Geoff (2008), Diggers, Levellers and Agrarian Capitalism: Radical Political Thought in Seventeenth Century England (Lanham: Lexington Books).
• Lilburne, John (1647), "Regall Tyrannie discovered: Or, A Discourse, shewing that all lawfull (approbational) instituted power by God amongst men, is by common agreement, and mutual consent", Tracts on Liberty by the Levellers and their Critics (1647), Liberty Fund. https://oll.libertyfund.org/title/hart-tracts-on-liberty-by-the-levellers-and-their-critics-vol-4-1647-forthcoming (15.11.2023).
• Lilburne, John ve William Walwyn (2004), "To the right honourable, the Commons of England in parliament assembled. The humble petition of divers well-affected persons inhabiting the City of London, Westminster, the Borough of Southwark, Hamlets and places adjacent", Sharp, Andrew (Der.), The English Levellers (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press): 131–140.
• Lilburne, John, William Walwyn, Thomas Prince ve Richard Overton (1944) "An Agreement of the Free People of England", Wolfe, Don. M. (Der.), Leveller Manifestoes of the Puritan Revolution (New York: Thomas Nelson and Sons): 400–410.
• Lilburne, John, William Walwyn, Thomas Prince ve Richard Overton (2004), "An agreement of the free people of England", Sharp, Andrew (Der.), The English Levellers (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press): 168–179.
• Locke, John (2002), Locke Political Essays, Goldie, Mark (Der.) (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
• Locke, John (2016), Second Treatise of Government and A Letter Concerning Toleration, Goldie, Mark (Der.) (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
• Locke, John (2018), Yönetim Üzerine İkinci İnceleme Sivil Yönetimin Gerçek Kökeni, Boyutu ve Amacı Üzerine Bir Deneme (Ankara: Eksi Kitaplar) (Çev. Fahri Bakırcı).
• Macpherson, Crawford B. (1962), The Political Theory of Possessive Individualism: Hobbes to Locke (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
• Moore, Barrington Jr. (1989), Diktatörlüğün ve Demokrasinin Toplumsal Kökenleri Çağdaş Dünyanın Yaratılmasında Soylunun ve Köylünün Rolü (Ankara: Verso Yayıncılık) (Çev. Şirin Tekeli ve Alaeddin Şenel,).
• Overton, Richard (1944), "An Appeale From the Degenerate Representative Body", Wolfe, Don M. (Der.), Leveller Manifestoes of the Puritan Revolution (New York: Thomas Nelson and Sons): 154–196.
• Overton, Richard (2004) "An Arrow Against All Tyrants", Sharp, Andrew (Der.), The English Levellers (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press): 54–73.
• Overton, Richard (1646), "A Defiance against all Arbitrary Usurpations Or Encroachments", https://quod.lib.umich.edu/e/eebo2/A90232.0001.001?rgn=main;view=fulltext, (15.11.2023).
• Pocock, John Greville A. (2014), "The Machiavellian Moment Florentine Political Thought and the Atlantic Republican Tradition", Paper Knowledge. Toward a Media History of Documents (Princeton: Princeton University Press).
• Prince, Thomas, Samuel Chidley ve William Larner (1944), "To the Supream Authority of England, the Commons in Parliament Assembled", Wolfe, Don M. (Der.), Leveller Manifestoes of the Puritan Revolution (New York: Thomas Nelson and Sons): 237–241.
• Robertson, Geoffrey (2018), The Levellers The Putney Debates (London: Verso).
• Rorty, Richard (1984), "The Historiography of Philosophy", Rorty, Richard , Jerome Schneewind ve Quentin Skinner (Der.), Philosophy in History (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press): 49–76.
• Schumaker, Paul, Dwight C. Kiel ve Thomas W. Heilke (1996), Great Ideas/Grand Schemes Political Ideologies in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries (New York: The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc).
• Simmons, A. John (1998), "‘Denisons’ and ‘Aliens’: Locke’s Problem of Political Consent", Social Theory and Practice, 24 (2): 161–182.
• Smith, George H., "How to Argue for Libertarianism", https://www.libertarianism.org/columns/how-argue-libertarianism (15.11.2023).
• Strauss, Leo (1999), Natural Right and History (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press).
• Vincent, Andrew (1990), "Classical Liberalism and Its Crisis of Identity", History of Political Thought, 11 (1): 143–161.
• Voegelin, Eric, Mary Algozin ve Keith Algozin (1974), "Liberalism and Its History", The Review of Politics, 36 (4): 504–520.
• Ward, Lee (2020), "Equity and Political Economy in Thomas Hobbes", American Journal of Political Science, 64 (4): 823–835.
• Wolfe, Don M. (1944), Leveller Manifestoes of the Puritan Revolution (New York: Thomas Nelson and Sons). Wood, Ellen M. (1992). "Locke Against Democracy: Consent, Representation and Suffrage in the ‘Two Treatises’", History of Political Thought, 13 (4): 657–689.
• Wood, Ellen M. (1994). "Radicalism, Capitalism and Historical Contexts : Not Only a Reply to Richard Ashcraft on John Locke", History of Political Thought, 15 (3): 323–372.
• Wood, Ellen M. ve Neal Wood (1997), A Trumpet of Sedition Political Theory and the Rise of Capitalism, 1589-1688 (New York: New York University Press).