Chapter XVII

Locke defines usurpation as domestic conquest, distinguishing it from lawful rule by the fact that the usurper has no right on his side, since usurpation means seizing what belongs to another.

Locke clarifies that usurpation is merely a change of persons in power, not a change in governmental forms and rules, though if the usurper exceeds the lawful bounds it becomes tyranny as well.

Locke argues that having rules for designating who holds power is as essential to legitimate government as the form of government itself, and these rules must originate from the people.

Locke draws a parallel between having no government form at all and having a government form but no method for designating the person who holds power, suggesting both constitute anarchy.

Locke asserts that all established commonwealths must have settled rules and methods for appointing rulers and conveying authority to them.

Locke contends that anyone who exercises power through means not prescribed by the community's laws has no right to obedience, regardless of whether the government's form is preserved.

Locke concludes that a usurper and his successors can never gain legitimate title to power unless the people, while free, actively consent to confirm the power that was usurped.