|
IamMe
|
 |
« on: March 18, 2008, 01:25:23 PM » |
|
…every man has a property in his own person. This nobody has any
right to but himself. The labour of his body and the work of his hands,
we may say, are properly his. Whatsoever, then, he removes out of the
state that nature hath provided and left it in, he hath mixed his labour
with it, and joined it to something that is his own, and thereby makes it
his property. It being by him removed from the common state nature
placed it in, it hath by this labour something annexed to it that excludes
the common right of other men. For this labour being the
unquestionable property of the labourer, no man but he can have a right
to what that is once joined to…
I am reading a book at the moment ( For A New Liberty: The Libertarian Manifesto by Murray Rothbard) which sets out the argument for libertarianism (specifically, the anarcho-capitalist version of it; where there is no state, only capitalism). Crucial to his argument is the idea that we all have a "natural right" to property ownership, quoting Locke. I thought this might make an interesting discussion (especially considering that Locke appears to be one of Callum's favourite philosophers). I feel Locke is begging the question: he assumes that by "mixing your labour" with something it becomes exclusively yours, but this is what he seeks to prove! I believe that everything on the planet is owned equally by everyone, and that by "fencing it off from the common" (another phrase used) i.e. asserting ownership you are essentially stealing it. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
OswaldTheOsprey
High Society
Hero Member
Karma: +100/-122
Posts: 9,152
|
|
« Reply #1 on: March 18, 2008, 02:13:18 PM » |
|
Personally, I tend to be more nationalistic than internationalist. Having said that, the individual can never come before the Motherland, IMHO. This is what I mean by Social Fascism. Patriotism and social justice.
OswaldTheOsprey
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Urbi et Orbi
|
|
|
|
tadpol
|
|
« Reply #2 on: March 18, 2008, 02:30:48 PM » |
|
I think it's important to note that when Locke was writing the world had a lot more space between elbows. Locke's dismissal of the value of the things removed from the state of nature strikes me as meaning he never considered finite resources. I believe that everything on the planet is owned equally by everyone, and that by "fencing it off from the common" (another phrase used) i.e. asserting ownership you are essentially stealing it.
I think dismissing the value added by labor or effort is at least as bad as only counting it. On Earth I think there is little or no state of nature left, as nations have claimed it all, which makes it harder for Locke's method of creating property to apply. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
IamMe
|
|
« Reply #3 on: March 18, 2008, 02:35:34 PM » |
|
I think it's important to note that when Locke was writing the world had a lot more space between elbows. Locke's dismissal of the value of the things removed from the state of nature strikes me as meaning he never considered finite resources. I believe that everything on the planet is owned equally by everyone, and that by "fencing it off from the common" (another phrase used) i.e. asserting ownership you are essentially stealing it.
I think dismissing the value added by labor or effort is at least as bad as only counting it. On Earth I think there is little or no state of nature left, as nations have claimed it all, which makes it harder for Locke's method of creating property to apply. I don't dismiss it - but a thief expends labour by stealing all someone's stuff: does that mean he has a degree of ownership of it? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
OswaldTheOsprey
High Society
Hero Member
Karma: +100/-122
Posts: 9,152
|
|
« Reply #4 on: March 18, 2008, 02:38:53 PM » |
|
It is my belief that there are basic rights and then luxuries. Everyone has a right to shelter-not a mansion; food-not caviar; etc.
OswaldTheOsprey
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Urbi et Orbi
|
|
|
|
IamMe
|
|
« Reply #5 on: March 18, 2008, 02:47:28 PM » |
|
It is my belief that there are basic rights and then luxuries. Everyone has a right to shelter-not a mansion; food-not caviar; etc.
Me too. Individual (as opposed to collective) property rights are contrary to that. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
tadpol
|
|
« Reply #6 on: March 18, 2008, 03:14:20 PM » |
|
I don't dismiss it - but a thief expends labour by stealing all someone's stuff: does that mean he has a degree of ownership of it?
Hmmm very good point. I'd say that the stuff is basically unchanged by changing hands or moving around a city, I guess I'd have some doubt about moving it between markets, but I'd cover that by saying since taking it is disallowed the rest gets dismissed. I don't understand how personal property can exist starting from group ownership. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
OswaldTheOsprey
High Society
Hero Member
Karma: +100/-122
Posts: 9,152
|
|
« Reply #7 on: March 18, 2008, 03:34:41 PM » |
|
It is my belief that there are basic rights and then luxuries. Everyone has a right to shelter-not a mansion; food-not caviar; etc.
Me too. Individual (as opposed to collective) property rights are contrary to that. They most certainly are if unchecked. It is trouble all way round-look at the subprime mess. OswaldTheOsprey |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Urbi et Orbi
|
|
|
Patton
Global Moderator
Hero Member
Karma: +88/-94
Posts: 1,253
"Battle is an orgy of disorder"
|
|
« Reply #8 on: March 18, 2008, 03:37:21 PM » |
|
I feel Locke is begging the question: he assumes that by "mixing your labour" with something it becomes exclusively yours..... Unless the "with something" was paid for or procured from someone else. I believe that everything on the planet is owned equally by everyone, and that by "fencing it off from the common" (another phrase used) i.e. asserting ownership you are essentially stealing it. Hogwash. What culture does not respect private property rights......whether it is a mudhut or an estate? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
I do not measure a mans success by how high he climbs but how high he bounces when he hits bottom.
-G.S. Patton, Jr.
|
|
|
|
Callum
|
|
« Reply #9 on: March 18, 2008, 03:50:56 PM » |
|
Well, I respect Locke for kicking off the British Empirical movement, and for some of his ideas on personal identity. But I can't say I go for his views on politics in general. Leads to abhorrent (to me) expressions of extreme individualism and libertarianism such as Nozicks Anarchy State and Utopia. Any credo that puts projections of the self in material objects (i.e property) above ones obligations to the rest of ones community (for me, humanity in general; for others, their family, lodge, town, state, nation....) - such a credo is essentially egoism and doomed to contradiction and ultimate self-destruction. I think you had a good point on question-begging, A. And tadpol re finite resources is good. I doff my cap to both! But to be fair, the thief scenario is covered by Locke's insistence on "from the common state nature placed it in". Thieves (rarely) nick raw materials in their original state of nature. And even if they do, one can argue that by publishing property rights over a resource, one HAS removed it from the state nature etc. Just goes to show the incoherence of the property meme... but good memes never let reason impede them.....  And like other primitive memes it is almost universal (non-property experiments usually end with the evil of property exercising destructive influence from within or without - the American Constitution - as interpreted by th 'supreme' court - will destroy the Amish, for example) |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
IamMe
|
|
« Reply #10 on: March 20, 2008, 12:07:48 PM » |
|
I feel Locke is begging the question: he assumes that by "mixing your labour" with something it becomes exclusively yours..... Unless the "with something" was paid for or procured from someone else. I believe that everything on the planet is owned equally by everyone, and that by "fencing it off from the common" (another phrase used) i.e. asserting ownership you are essentially stealing it. Hogwash. What culture does not respect private property rights......whether it is a mudhut or an estate? Patton just because something is near-universal does not make it right. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Patton
Global Moderator
Hero Member
Karma: +88/-94
Posts: 1,253
"Battle is an orgy of disorder"
|
|
« Reply #11 on: March 20, 2008, 12:46:37 PM » |
|
I feel Locke is begging the question: he assumes that by "mixing your labour" with something it becomes exclusively yours..... Unless the "with something" was paid for or procured from someone else. I believe that everything on the planet is owned equally by everyone, and that by "fencing it off from the common" (another phrase used) i.e. asserting ownership you are essentially stealing it. Hogwash. What culture does not respect private property rights......whether it is a mudhut or an estate? Patton just because something is near-universal does not make it right. Then you can hand the keys to your house and car to any Tom, Dick and Harry who feels they should belong to him.....as for mine.....they will be staring down the barrel of my Desert Eagle 0.50...... |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
I do not measure a mans success by how high he climbs but how high he bounces when he hits bottom.
-G.S. Patton, Jr.
|
|
|
|
IamMe
|
|
« Reply #12 on: March 20, 2008, 01:04:53 PM » |
|
I feel Locke is begging the question: he assumes that by "mixing your labour" with something it becomes exclusively yours..... Unless the "with something" was paid for or procured from someone else. I believe that everything on the planet is owned equally by everyone, and that by "fencing it off from the common" (another phrase used) i.e. asserting ownership you are essentially stealing it. Hogwash. What culture does not respect private property rights......whether it is a mudhut or an estate? Patton just because something is near-universal does not make it right. Then you can hand the keys to your house and car to any Tom, Dick and Harry who feels they should belong to him.....as for mine.....they will be staring down the barrel of my Desert Eagle 0.50...... Nice try. Obviously I'm not going to do that within the system we have. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Patton
Global Moderator
Hero Member
Karma: +88/-94
Posts: 1,253
"Battle is an orgy of disorder"
|
|
« Reply #13 on: March 20, 2008, 02:58:36 PM » |
|
I feel Locke is begging the question: he assumes that by "mixing your labour" with something it becomes exclusively yours..... Unless the "with something" was paid for or procured from someone else. I believe that everything on the planet is owned equally by everyone, and that by "fencing it off from the common" (another phrase used) i.e. asserting ownership you are essentially stealing it. Hogwash. What culture does not respect private property rights......whether it is a mudhut or an estate? Patton just because something is near-universal does not make it right. Then you can hand the keys to your house and car to any Tom, Dick and Harry who feels they should belong to him.....as for mine.....they will be staring down the barrel of my Desert Eagle 0.50...... Nice try. Obviously I'm not going to do that within the system we have. Oh, I get it....this was all just "pie in the sky" talk.....nothing to do with reality. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
I do not measure a mans success by how high he climbs but how high he bounces when he hits bottom.
-G.S. Patton, Jr.
|
|
|
OswaldTheOsprey
High Society
Hero Member
Karma: +100/-122
Posts: 9,152
|
|
« Reply #14 on: March 20, 2008, 03:04:25 PM » |
|
I feel Locke is begging the question: he assumes that by "mixing your labour" with something it becomes exclusively yours..... Unless the "with something" was paid for or procured from someone else. I believe that everything on the planet is owned equally by everyone, and that by "fencing it off from the common" (another phrase used) i.e. asserting ownership you are essentially stealing it. Hogwash. What culture does not respect private property rights......whether it is a mudhut or an estate? Patton just because something is near-universal does not make it right. Then you can hand the keys to your house and car to any Tom, Dick and Harry who feels they should belong to him.....as for mine.....they will be staring down the barrel of my Desert Eagle 0.50...... Nice try. Obviously I'm not going to do that within the system we have. Oh, I get it....this was all just "pie in the sky" talk.....nothing to do with reality. "Pie in the sky" perhaps. However, many things we now take for granted were once thus classified. OswaldTheOsprey |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Urbi et Orbi
|
|
|
|
