The people could therefore withdraw their adherence to attention and form another government for their protection, popular sovereignty. For Locke, revoking consent meant replacing one monarch with another. A recent arrival in the role of local government in public health is the collection of household garbage. Our 19th century predecessors, according to historian Andrew Hurley, were better at recycling than we are today. Of course, our forerunners used far fewer disposable containers and threw very few reusable containers. In addition, most people had or had access to pigs to which they fed edible scrap metal. « They turned the garbage, » Hurley says, « into bacon. » One of these consequences is that « strong waste management » – collecting waste and putting in place what to do with it – is a bigger problem than ever for city governments. Quentin Skinner argued that several critical modern innovations in contract theory are found in the writings of French Calvinists and Huguenots, whose work was used by writers in the Netherlands who resisted submission to Spain and, later, to Catholics in England.  Francisco Suarez (1548-1617), of the Salamanca school, could be considered a former social contract theorist, who theorized natural law by trying to limit the divine right of absolute monarchy. All these groups have been led to articulate conceptions of popular sovereignty through a confederation or social treaty, and all these arguments began with proto-« State of Nature » arguments that the basis of the policy is that everyone is inherently free from submission to any government. After the introduction of private property, the initial conditions of inequality were strengthened.
Some have property, others are forced to work for them, and the development of social classes begins. In the end, those who have property realize that it would be in their interest to create a government that protects private property from those who do not, but that can see that they could acquire it by force. Thus, the government is founded by a treaty that purports to guarantee equality and the protection of all, when its real purpose is to pinpoint precisely the inequalities that private property has created. In other words, the treaty, which claims to be in everyone`s interest, is really in the interest of the few people who have become richer and enriched through the development of private property. It is the naturalized social contract that Rousseau considers responsible for the conflict and competition that modern society suffers from. The theory of hypothetical approval of the governed is that the obligation to obey the government depends on whether the government agrees with it, or whether the people, if they were put in a state of nature without a government, would approve that government.  This theory has been rejected by some scholars [who?] who argue that, since the government itself can commit aggression, the formation of a government to protect the people from aggression would resemble the people, if one had a choice of which animals they should be attacked, and that they are « polecats and foxes for a lion », a trade they would not make.  Since the end of the « Confederation of Men for the Common Good » (paragraph 124) is the preservation of its wealth and the maintenance of one`s life, liberty and well-being in general, Locke can easily imagine the conditions under which the pact with the government is destroyed, and people have the right to oppose the authority of a civilian government as a king.
If the executive power of a government passes to tyranny, for example by dissolving the legislative power and thus denying the people the opportunity to legislate for its own conservation, the resulting tyrant places himself in a state of nature and, in particular, in a state of war with the people, and then they have the same right to self-defense as before the pact. to establish society in general.