The fundamental challenge for Locke in Chapter V is to explain how, if land and many other resources are originally held in common, such that each of us has a right to use any of it, we can come legitimately to be excluded from much of it.  Private property increases the rights of the property owner, but by limiting rights previously held by everyone else.  What could render this limitation on every other person's rights legitimate?

Locke's answer is provided by his "mixing argument," e.g. in Par. 27, which comes in a package with his provisos -- conditions -- on what mixing your labor entitles you to, the spoilage proviso, e.g. Par. 31, and the "enough and as good" proviso, Par. 33.  These rules governing legitimate acquisition of property are dictates of the law of nature, and we can legitimately acquire property in land in the state of nature.

These terms of appropriation, Locke himself agrees, would "confine every man's possession to a very moderate proportion," (Par. 36) if not for the invention of money (Par. 36 and 37), which legitimates radically unequal holdings that would otherwise violate the provisos on the extent of legitimate holdings.  Locke's argument for HOW money accomplishes this (e.g. in 46, 47, 49, 50) is of considerable importance.

Locke is one of the authors Smith refers to as "civilians," those who think that property is acquired in the State of Nature, and that what legitimates government, leaving the State of Nature, is Contract to protect our property.  Smith rejects the view that the ground of legitimacy for political society is provided by contract and consent, e.g. in his arguments on pp. 402 ff.  Since Locke's argument appealing to money also depends upon the appeal to consent, it is interesting to ask whether Smith's criticisms apply to these arguments as well.

Smith is not a "civilian," and, although his view on property is complex, he is clear that on his view people cannot have a legitimate property in land in the state of nature, because such legitimate holdings in land require "common agreement." (460)  

 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Gero - Final Farewell Blog Post Fifteen

        The concept of the private government of the modern workplace as described by Anderson in Chapter 2 of   Private Government   enforces a double jeopardy on women in particular. In her paper “Unstrapping the Straitjacket of Preference” Anderson asserts that “bargaining theory recommends that, if women are to improve their situation, they ought to seek employment outside of the home” (page 35). Women’s situation is also improved as work allows women to create an identity outside of the home through joining larger group identities (page 36). Putting this dilemma in the language of   Private Government , women suffer under the patriarchal private governments of the home, where fathers and husbands exert arbitrary and unaccountable power over them. To create identity, they must then join additional private government outside of the home and in the workplace.             While many...
Read more

Mehra - Blog Post "Lucky Number 13"

  In “Unstrapping the Straightjacket of ‘Preference;’ a Comment on Amartya Sen’s Contributions to Philosophy and Economics”, Elizabeth Anderson expands Sen’s suspicion of ‘preference’ as the function of rational decision making. In attempting to fill Sen’s lacuna regarding rational judgments and building off his prior work, Anderson puts forth “ The Priority of Identity to Rational Principle : what principle of choice it is rational to act on depends on a prior determination of personal identity, of who one is” (30). Identity advances the force of collective agency. According to Anderson, “In taking up the perspective of collective agency, the parties to an n-person prisoner’s dilemma can see their actions as jointly advancing a desirable goal even though none of their actions taken in isolation has a positive marginal impact on that goal” (30). Identity with part of a group compels them to take membership in collective action and advance shared goals. Identity is messy, nuanced, a...
Read more

Discussion Leader Sign Up

  Discussion Leader Sign Up (“bb” = before break; “ab” = after break)   March 25: Brettschneider   When the State … (bb): Wills March 25: Brettschneider When the State … (ab): Josh   April 1: Brettschneider (bb): Brettschneider April 1: Brettschneider (ab): Tara   April 8: Scalia et al (bb): Olivia April 8: Scalia et al (ab): Jess   April 15: Adam Smith (bb):Cam April 15: Adam Smith (ab):Daniel K   April 22: Sen (bb): Amari April 22: Sen (ab): Daniel H   April 29: Anderson “Unstrapping…” (bb): April 29: Anderson “Unstrapping…” (ab):   May 4: Anderson Private Government (bb): Alexis May 4: Anderson Private Government (ab): Sarah   May 6: Anderson (bb): Anderson
Read more