The right of resistance is the Enlightenment principle, most associated with John Locke, that people may resist or overthrow a government that violates their natural rights, because legitimate authority comes from the consent of the governed rather than divine right (AP Euro Topic 4.3, KC-2.3.III.A).
The right of resistance is the logical endpoint of social contract theory. Here's the chain of reasoning Locke laid out. People are born with natural rights (life, liberty, property). They consent to form a government to protect those rights. So if the government starts violating the very rights it was created to protect, the contract is broken, and the people get to resist it, even overthrow it. Government is a deal, not a divine gift, and deals can be canceled.
This was radical in the 1600s and 1700s because it flipped the dominant theory of authority on its head. Under divine right, kings answered to God alone, and rebelling against your monarch was rebelling against God. Under Locke's model, kings answer to the people. The CED captures this directly in KC-2.3.III.A, which says political theories like Locke's argued the state originated in the consent of the governed (a social contract) rather than in divine right or tradition. The right of resistance is what makes that consent meaningful. Consent you can never withdraw isn't really consent.
This term lives in Topic 4.3 (The Enlightenment) in Unit 4 and supports both learning objectives there. AP Euro 4.3.A asks you to explain the causes and consequences of Enlightenment thought on European society, and the right of resistance is one of the biggest consequences, since it gave revolutionaries in America and France an intellectual license to act. AP Euro 4.3.B asks you to explain the Enlightenment's influence on intellectual development, and this idea is the political payoff of applying reason to human institutions (KC-2.3.I.A). Locke and Rousseau built new political models on natural rights and the social contract (KC-2.3.I.B), and the right of resistance is the enforcement mechanism baked into those models. It's also a perfect continuity-and-change thread, running from the Glorious Revolution through the Atlantic Revolutions.
Keep studying AP® Euro Unit 4
Social Contract and Natural Rights (Unit 4)
The right of resistance only makes sense inside social contract theory. If government exists because people consented to it to protect natural rights, then breaking that protection voids the deal. Think of resistance as the contract's escape clause.
Glorious Revolution and the English Bill of Rights (Unit 3)
Locke wrote in the shadow of 1688, when Parliament removed James II and installed William and Mary under conditions. His Two Treatises read like a philosophical defense of that event, turning a political coup into a principle anyone could cite.
American Revolution (Unit 4)
The Declaration of Independence is basically the right of resistance in document form. Jefferson lists the king's violations of natural rights, then concludes the colonists may 'alter or abolish' the government. That's Locke's logic applied across the Atlantic.
French Revolution (Unit 5)
French revolutionaries used the same justification when they dismantled the Old Regime, and the Declaration of the Rights of Man echoes Lockean natural rights language. This makes the right of resistance your best bridge between Unit 4 ideas and Unit 5 events.
You'll most often see this idea tested indirectly. A multiple-choice stem might give you an excerpt from Locke's Two Treatises or the Declaration of Independence and ask what Enlightenment principle it reflects, or ask how Enlightenment political thought challenged divine-right monarchy. No released FRQ has used the phrase 'right of resistance' verbatim, but it's exactly the kind of concept that powers causation essays on the French Revolution and continuity arguments connecting the Glorious Revolution, American Revolution, and French Revolution. The move the exam rewards is specificity. Don't just say 'Enlightenment ideas caused revolution.' Say that Locke's social contract theory held that government rests on consent, so when rulers violated natural rights, revolutionaries claimed a legitimate right to resist and replace them.
Both Hobbes and Locke used social contract theory, but they reached opposite conclusions about resistance. Hobbes argued people surrender their rights permanently to an absolute sovereign to escape the chaos of the state of nature, so rebellion is never justified. Locke argued people only lend power to government conditionally, so when it violates natural rights, resistance is justified. Same contract framework, opposite verdicts on revolution. On the exam, if a passage defends absolute authority, think Hobbes; if it justifies overthrowing tyranny, think Locke.
The right of resistance is Locke's principle that people may overthrow a government that violates the natural rights it was created to protect.
It follows directly from social contract theory, since a government built on consent loses legitimacy when it breaks the contract (KC-2.3.III.A).
It directly contradicted divine-right monarchy, which held that kings answered only to God and could never be legitimately resisted.
Hobbes and Locke both used social contract theory, but only Locke concluded that resistance to a rights-violating government is justified.
American and French revolutionaries used the right of resistance to justify overthrowing their governments, making it a key Unit 4 to Unit 5 bridge.
On essays, cite Locke by name and explain the consent-violation-resistance chain instead of vaguely saying 'Enlightenment ideas inspired revolution.'
It's the Enlightenment principle, developed by John Locke, that people may resist or overthrow a government that violates their natural rights. Since government rests on the consent of the governed rather than divine right, a rights-violating government loses its legitimacy. It's tested in Topic 4.3, The Enlightenment.
Not from scratch, but he gave it its most influential form. Resistance theories existed earlier (some religious thinkers justified resisting 'ungodly' rulers), but Locke's Two Treatises of Government grounded it in natural rights and the social contract, which is the version the AP Euro CED emphasizes and the version revolutionaries actually cited.
The social contract is the agreement itself, where people consent to government in exchange for protection of their natural rights. The right of resistance is what happens when government breaks that agreement. One is the deal, the other is the consequence of violating it.
No. Hobbes used social contract theory but argued people permanently surrender their rights to an absolute sovereign, so rebellion is never legitimate. Locke is the one who built resistance into the contract. The exam loves this contrast, so know which thinker reached which conclusion.
It gave revolutionaries an intellectual justification for dismantling the Old Regime. If Louis XVI's government violated the people's natural rights, then under Locke's logic the people could legitimately resist and replace it. The Declaration of the Rights of Man (1789) reflects this natural rights framework, making the right of resistance a key cause to cite in Unit 5 essays.
Connect this key term to the AP exam workflow: review the course, practice questions, and check related study tools.
Review units, study guides, and course resources.
Check this vocabulary in multiple-choice context.
Apply key concepts in written AP responses.
Estimate the exam score you are working toward.
Review the highest-yield facts before practice.
Put the full course together before test day.