This seminal work by political philosopher C.B. Macpherson was first published by the Clarendon Press in 1962, and remains of key importance to the study of liberal-democratic theory half-a-century later. In it, Macpherson argues that the chief difficulty of the notion of individualism that underpins classical liberalism lies in what he calls its "possessive quality"--"its conception of the individual as essentially the proprietor of his own person or capacities, owing nothing to society for them." Under such a conception, the essence of humanity becomes freedom from dependence on the wills of others; society is little more than a system of economic relations; and political society becomes a means of safeguarding private property and the system of economic relations rooted in property.

As the New Statesman declared: "It is rare for a book to change the intellectual landscape. It is even more unusual for this to happen when the subject is one that has been thoroughly investigated by generations of historians. . . Until the appearance of Professor Macpherson's book, it seemed unlikely that anything radically new could be said about so well-worn a topic. The unexpected has happened, and the shock waves are still being absorbed."

A new introduction by Frank Cunningham puts the work in a twenty-first-century context.

Reader Reviews

John Smith

(4/5)

Jul 13, 2025

Reasonable idea, but wrong

Ram

(5/5)

A very tough high level political philosophy book arguing against john locke and ultimately the faults of private property

Janice Feng

Completely wrong about Hobbes. Makes sense in terms of Locke. But isn't that obvious...

Vince Jeffrey

A great reading to flesh out 17th century political theory. Seems to reveal a lot in the theories of Hobbes, the Levellers and Locke which were confusing or appeared contradictory. This is done with what appear to be reasonable inferences from their writings and the ideas of the time. It has the surprising outcome of actually pulling together a lot of similarities among those theories, to the point that Locke seems fairly similar to Hobbes, but without a self-perpetuating sovereign, since Hobbes...

Justin Evans

(3/5)

An odd blend of the irrelevance, tedium and brilliance. MacPherson's general approach to early modern political theorists is spot on: they all describe the social conditions of their time, but claim that they're describing human nature. His attention to detail is impressive, and his readings of Locke and Hobbes are compelling, if more than a bit tendentious. The irrelevance of the book is twofold: first, the chapters on Harrington and the Levellers can only be of concern to people who study the

Falk

Macpherson's analysis of Hobbes and Locke is quite brilliant. The middle part of the book is more uneven; I found the chapter on the Levellers a bit tedious, though still interesting both in itself as well as in this context. It gets a lot more intriguing when he writes about Harrington, a theorist I didn't know much about, and this was as great an introduction to him as I could have wished for. Macpherson goes to the root of the underlying assumptions behind the seeming inconsistencies in Hobbe...

Randal Samstag

The classic evaluation of English political theory that helps make the case that Locke was "the confused man's Hobbes."

Don

Possessive individualism was, for MacPherson, the defining characteristic of the bourgeoisie. It was a concept of the relationship between human beings and the natural world that united all of its ideologues during the period when the class detached itself from preceding social relationships rooted in custom and hierarchical obligation, with the trajectory between the brutal and coarse views of Thomas Hobbes and the classical liberal viewpoint of John Locke illustrating this point.Hobbes commenc...

Meghna Kajla

i want to read this book

Chris Duval

If like me one had read only Hobbes' Leviathan and Locke's Two Treatises on Government, one will gain breadth and social context from reading C.B. Macpherson's book. Whether his core premise convinces is less certain, but it is clearly written. I was persuaded by his statements about Hobbes' implicit assumptions, and how they shaped his political philosophy. But his arguments about the Levelers and Harrington seemed forced. They took on a quality found in apologies in that the author tried to me...

Alan Johnson

I finished reading The Political Theory of Possessive Individualism this evening. I probably agree with about one-third of Macpherson's book, probably disagree with another third, and am very much unsure about the remaining third. Accordingly, I am unable to rate the book at this time. That said, Macpherson has a very interesting and in-depth discussion of Locke as well as of Hobbes, the Levellers, and Harrington. His approach, albeit somewhat reductive, is quite thought-provoking and bears furt...

Steven Peterson

An intriguing argument. The debate between ndividualism and communitarianism continues. Macpherson argues that (Page 3) ". . .the difficulties of modern liberal-democratic theory lie deeper than had been thought, that the original seventeenth-century theory individualism contained the central difficulty, which lay in its possessive quality. Its possessive quality is found in its conception of the individual as essentially the proprietor of his own person or capacities, owing nothing to society f...

Leonardo

...es el mercado el fundamento de los valores de la reproducción social. Imperio Pág.69Historia de las Ideas de la Modernidad. Unidad 1.

Subscribe to Read | $0.00

Popular Genres

Subscribe to Read | $0.00

The Political Theory of Possessive Individualism: Hobbes to Locke

The Political Theory of Possessive Individualism: Hobbes to Locke

The Political Theory of Possessive Individualism: Hobbes to Locke

More books from C. B. Macpherson

Reader Reviews