In: Psychology
1) John Locke would argue that Niccolo Machiavelli represents the interests of dictators who rule without the consent of the people. Why would he reach that conclusion?
2) Karl Marx would argue that Locke represents the ideology of capitalism even before the emergence of the modern industry. Why would Marx reach that conclusion?
1. John Locke truly believed in the fact that social contract is one where public will and consent is taken into consideration by the ruling party or government. He truly believed that every human being had the right to life, opinion, and liberty and that he should not be ruled by anyone. This concept was truly against the one that was followed by Niccolo Machiavelli. He was of the opinion that power by rulers as in the case of a monarchy must be used effectively without considering the interest of the public. Even if, some acts could be immoral, it shall be implemented by the governing body for the welfare of the country. It is because of the fact that public interest is not taken in his view that John Locke argues against this concept.
2. Like I have mentioned in the above answer, Locke's views were never capitalistic as his views were almost against capitalism. However, there is a mentioning with respect to inheriting property and doing business which was seen by Marx as a capitalist approach. Marx truly believed that it is the inherent property and business which leads to unequal distribution of wealth and income among different classes of people living in a society. Marx would have found this mentioning by Locke purely capitalistic, else there is no defending rationale for the same.