Ordinary language of conquest substitutes for any real title to rule.

Evidence

This I doubt not, but at first sight will seem a strange doctrine, it being so quite contrary to the practice of the world; there being nothing more familiar in speaking of the dominion of countries, than to say such an one conquered it; as if conquest, without any more ado, conveyed a right of possession. — , Second-Treatise-of-Government-1645716289, 3569

Categorization

• SEED: Article angle: how the everyday phrase ‘so-and-so conquered it’ does the legitimating work that political theory refuses to do.
• QUESTION: How far does Locke go in following this critique of customary usage as a source of political legitimacy?
• XREF: connects to: Unjust conquest confers no right over the conquered — John Locke, Second Treatise of Government, 222; A cultural tradition can substitute for a weak tradition of national political unity; Colonizers define Indigenous title among themselves without Indigenous participation — Doctrine of Discovery Project, The Marshall Trilogy: Johnson v.…, 9 (+1 more)

Broader Connections

• Unjust conquest confers no right over the conquered #corroborates (1.00) — John Locke, Second Treatise of Government, 222
• Colonizers define Indigenous title among themselves without Indigenous participation #expands (0.95) — Doctrine of Discovery Project, The Marshall Trilogy, 9
• A cultural tradition can substitute for a weak tradition of national political unity #complicates (0.85)
• Colonial rule operated through habit-taking into existing conventions and commonsense #complicates (0.85)