1 00:00:04,110 --> 00:00:08,290 funding for this program is provided by

2 00:00:08,290 --> 00:00:15,290 additional funding provided by

3 00:00:31,859 --> 00:00:38,859 today we turn to John Locke

4 00:00:39,430 --> 00:00:42,269 on the face of it

5 00:00:42,270 --> 00:00:45,180 Locke is a powerful ally

6 00:00:45,180 --> 00:00:47,420 of the libertarian

7 00:00:47,420 --> 00:00:48,710 first

8 00:00:48,710 --> 00:00:51,040 he believes,

9 00:00:51,040 --> 00:00:54,940 as libertarians today maintain

10 00:00:54,940 --> 00:00:59,930 that there are certain fundamental individual rights

11 00:00:59,930 --> 00:01:01,520 that are so important

12 00:01:01,520 --> 00:01:03,690 that no government

13 00:01:03,690 --> 00:01:08,670 even a representative government even a democratically elected government

14 00:01:08,670 --> 00:01:12,440 can override them. 15 00:01:12,440 --> 00:01:14,110 not only that

16 00:01:14,110 --> 00:01:16,090 he believes

17 00:01:16,090 --> 00:01:19,159 that those fundamental rights include

18 00:01:19,159 --> 00:01:23,200 a natural right

19 00:01:23,200 --> 00:01:29,290 to life liberty and property

20 00:01:29,290 --> 00:01:30,240 and

21 00:01:30,240 --> 00:01:32,160 furthermore he argues

22 00:01:32,160 --> 00:01:37,050 that the right to property

23 00:01:37,050 --> 00:01:39,350 is not just the creation

24 00:01:39,350 --> 00:01:41,000 of government

25 00:01:41,000 --> 00:01:42,520 or of law

26 00:01:42,520 --> 00:01:46,860 the right to property is a natural right

27 00:01:46,860 --> 00:01:47,760 in the sense that

28 00:01:47,760 --> 00:01:51,550 it is pre-political

29 00:01:51,550 --> 00:01:53,509 it is a right

30 00:01:53,510 --> 00:01:57,390 that attaches to individuals

31 00:01:57,390 --> 00:01:59,549 as human beings

32 00:01:59,549 --> 00:02:02,630 even before government comes on the scene

33 00:02:02,630 --> 00:02:08,288 even before parliaments and legislatures enact laws to define rights

34 00:02:08,288 --> 00:02:10,478 and to enforce them

35 00:02:10,479 --> 00:02:12,609 Locke says in order to think about

36 00:02:12,609 --> 00:02:15,789 what it means to have a natural right

37 00:02:15,789 --> 00:02:17,980 we have to imagine

38 00:02:17,980 --> 00:02:21,429 the way things are

39 00:02:21,429 --> 00:02:24,199 before government

40 00:02:24,199 --> 00:02:26,450 before law

41 00:02:26,450 --> 00:02:28,138 and that's what Locke means

42 00:02:28,139 --> 00:02:31,039 by the state of nature.

43 00:02:31,039 --> 00:02:38,039 he says the state of nature is the state of liberty

44 00:02:39,059 --> 00:02:42,709 human beings are free and equal beings

45 00:02:42,709 --> 00:02:46,569 there is no natural hierarchy

46 00:02:46,569 --> 00:02:51,458 it's not the case that some people are born to be kings and others were born to be

47 00:02:51,459 --> 00:02:53,589 serfs

48 00:02:53,589 --> 00:02:57,119 we're free and equal in the state of nature

49 00:02:57,119 --> 00:02:59,109 and yet

50 00:02:59,109 --> 00:03:00,779 he makes the point

51 00:03:00,779 --> 00:03:04,719 but there's a difference between a state of liberty and the state of

52 00:03:04,719 --> 00:03:08,959 license

53 00:03:08,959 --> 00:03:12,659 and the reason is that even in the state of nature there is a kind of the law it's not

54 00:03:12,659 --> 00:03:15,469 the kind of law the legislatures enact

55 00:03:15,469 --> 00:03:18,888 it's the law of nature

56 00:03:18,889 --> 00:03:22,379 and this law of nature

57 00:03:22,379 --> 00:03:22,899 constrains

58 00:03:22,900 --> 00:03:24,469 what we can do

59 00:03:24,469 --> 00:03:25,819 even though we're free

60 00:03:25,819 --> 00:03:28,988 even though we're in the state of nature

61 00:03:28,989 --> 00:03:33,329 well what are the constraints?

62 00:03:33,329 --> 00:03:35,979 the only constraint

63 00:03:35,979 --> 00:03:39,029 given by the laws of nature

64 00:03:39,029 --> 00:03:40,639 is that

65 00:03:40,639 --> 00:03:43,069 the rights we have

66 00:03:43,069 --> 00:03:45,509 the national rights we have

67 00:03:45,509 --> 00:03:49,429 we can't give up

68 00:03:49,430 --> 00:03:53,759 nor can we take them from somebody else

69 00:03:53,759 --> 00:03:55,569 under the law of nature I'm not free

70 00:03:55,569 --> 00:03:58,298 take somebody else's

71 00:03:58,299 --> 00:04:00,699 life or liberty 72 00:04:00,699 --> 00:04:02,839 or property

73 00:04:02,839 --> 00:04:04,230 nor am I

74 00:04:04,230 --> 00:04:05,828 free

75 00:04:05,829 --> 00:04:08,409 to take my own

76 00:04:08,409 --> 00:04:12,029 life liberty or property

77 00:04:12,029 --> 00:04:14,059 even though I'm free,

78 00:04:14,059 --> 00:04:15,228 I'm not free

79 00:04:15,229 --> 00:04:18,419 to violate the laws of nature, I'm not free to

80 00:04:18,418 --> 00:04:19,698 take my own life

81 00:04:19,699 --> 00:04:22,569 or to sell myself into slavery

82 00:04:22,569 --> 00:04:24,240 or to give to somebody else

83 00:04:24,240 --> 00:04:27,030 arbitrary absolute power

84 00:04:27,030 --> 00:04:28,619 over me

85 00:04:28,619 --> 00:04:30,789 so where does this constraint 86 00:04:30,789 --> 00:04:37,219 you may think it's a fairly minimal constraint, but where does it come from?

87 00:04:37,219 --> 00:04:40,299 Well Locke tells us where it comes from

88 00:04:40,299 --> 00:04:43,489 and he gives two answers

89 00:04:43,490 --> 00:04:45,669 here's the first answer

90 00:04:45,669 --> 00:04:48,128 for men

91 00:04:48,129 --> 00:04:51,029 being all the workmanship

92 00:04:51,029 --> 00:04:51,830 of one

93 00:04:51,830 --> 00:04:57,050 omnipotent and infinitely wise maker, namely God,

94 00:04:57,050 --> 00:04:59,149 they're his property

95 00:04:59,149 --> 00:05:03,189 whose workmanship they are, made to last during his,

96 00:05:03,189 --> 00:05:05,909 not one another's pleasure.

97 00:05:05,909 --> 00:05:09,909 so one answer the question is why can't I give up my

98 00:05:09,909 --> 00:05:12,889 natural rights to life liberty and property

99 00:05:12,889 --> 00:05:18,969 well they're not strictly speaking yours 100 00:05:18,969 --> 00:05:20,319 after all

101 00:05:20,319 --> 00:05:21,460 you are

102 00:05:21,460 --> 00:05:25,089 the creature of God.

103 00:05:25,089 --> 00:05:26,219 God has a

104 00:05:26,220 --> 00:05:28,120 bigger property right in us

105 00:05:28,120 --> 00:05:31,449 a prior priority right

106 00:05:31,449 --> 00:05:33,189 now you might say that

107 00:05:33,189 --> 00:05:38,219 an unsatisfying unconvincing answer at least for those who don't believe in God

108 00:05:38,219 --> 00:05:41,430 what did Locke have to say to them

109 00:05:41,430 --> 00:05:44,780 well here's where Locke appeals to the idea

110 00:05:44,780 --> 00:05:47,159 of reason

111 00:05:47,160 --> 00:05:49,939 and this is the idea

112 00:05:49,939 --> 00:05:52,030 that if we properly reflect

113 00:05:52,030 --> 00:05:54,938 on what it means to be free 114 00:05:54,939 --> 00:05:57,180 we will be lead to the conclusion

115 00:05:57,180 --> 00:06:02,499 that freedom can't just be a matter of doing whatever we want

116 00:06:02,499 --> 00:06:04,520 I think this is what Locke means

117 00:06:04,520 --> 00:06:06,169 when he says

118 00:06:06,169 --> 00:06:10,240 the state of nature has a law of nature to govern it which obliges everyone

119 00:06:10,240 --> 00:06:11,770 and reason

120 00:06:11,770 --> 00:06:14,568 which is that law

121 00:06:14,569 --> 00:06:19,780 teaches all mankind, who will but consult it, that being all equal and independent

122 00:06:19,780 --> 00:06:24,839 no one ought to harm another in his life health liberty for possessions

123 00:06:24,839 --> 00:06:26,770 this leads

124 00:06:26,770 --> 00:06:31,198 to a puzzling paradoxical

125 00:06:31,199 --> 00:06:34,529 feature to Locke's account of rights

126 00:06:34,529 --> 00:06:36,479 familiar in one sense

127 00:06:36,479 --> 00:06:39,930 but strange in another

128 00:06:39,930 --> 00:06:41,719 it's the idea

129 00:06:41,719 --> 00:06:44,199 that out natural rights are inalienable

130 00:06:44,199 --> 00:06:45,990 what does unalienable mean?

131 00:06:45,990 --> 00:06:49,930 it's not for us to alienate them or to get them up to give them a way to trade them the way

132 00:06:49,930 --> 00:06:52,599 to sell them

133 00:06:52,599 --> 00:06:54,169 consider an airline ticket

134 00:06:54,169 --> 00:06:56,389 airline tickets are nontransferable

135 00:06:56,389 --> 00:07:00,889 or tickets to the patriots or to the red sox

136 00:07:00,889 --> 00:07:03,810 nontransferable tickets

137 00:07:03,810 --> 00:07:06,259 are unalienable

138 00:07:06,259 --> 00:07:07,739 I own them

139 00:07:07,739 --> 00:07:09,340 in the limited sense

140 00:07:09,340 --> 00:07:13,179 that I can use them for myself but I can't trade them away

141 00:07:13,180 --> 00:07:18,609 so in one sense an unalienable right, a nontransferable right

142 00:07:18,609 --> 00:07:21,630 makes something I own

143 00:07:21,630 --> 00:07:22,620 less

144 00:07:22,620 --> 00:07:25,589 fully mine

145 00:07:25,589 --> 00:07:27,789 but in another sense

146 00:07:27,789 --> 00:07:29,370 of unalienable

147 00:07:29,370 --> 00:07:31,580 rights

148 00:07:31,580 --> 00:07:37,039 especially where we're thinking about life liberty and property

149 00:07:37,039 --> 00:07:42,520 for a right to be unalienable, makes it more deeply more profoundly mine

150 00:07:42,520 --> 00:07:44,150 and that's Locke's

151 00:07:44,150 --> 00:07:45,250 sense

152 00:07:45,250 --> 00:07:47,469 of unalienable

153 00:07:47,469 --> 00:07:51,520 we see it in the American declaration of independence Thomas Jefferson

154 00:07:51,520 --> 00:07:54,469 drew on this idea of Locke 155 00:07:54,469 --> 00:07:56,050 unalienable rights

156 00:07:56,050 --> 00:07:57,650 to life liberty

157 00:07:57,650 --> 00:07:59,948 and as Jefferson amended Locke,

158 00:07:59,949 --> 00:08:04,889 to the pursuit of happiness. unalienable rights

159 00:08:04,889 --> 00:08:08,139 rights that are so

160 00:08:08,139 --> 00:08:11,479 essentially mine

161 00:08:11,479 --> 00:08:17,520 that even I can't trade them away or give them up

162 00:08:17,520 --> 00:08:21,030 so these are the rights we have in the state of nature

163 00:08:21,030 --> 00:08:24,089 before there is any government

164 00:08:24,089 --> 00:08:29,379 in the case of life and liberty I can't take my own life I can't sell myself into slavery

165 00:08:29,379 --> 00:08:36,379 anymore than I can take somebody else's life or take someone else as a slave by force

166 00:08:36,390 --> 00:08:39,360 but how does that work in the case of property?

167 00:08:39,360 --> 00:08:42,590 because it's essential to Locke's case

168 00:08:42,590 --> 00:08:45,020 that private property

169 00:08:45,020 --> 00:08:47,350 can arise

170 00:08:47,350 --> 00:08:50,850 even before there is any government

171 00:08:50,850 --> 00:08:54,580 how can there be a right to private property

172 00:08:54,580 --> 00:08:56,830 even before there is any

173 00:08:56,830 --> 00:08:59,440 government?

174 00:08:59,440 --> 00:09:01,730 Locke's famous answer

175 00:09:01,730 --> 00:09:04,330 comes in section twenty seven

176 00:09:04,330 --> 00:09:08,290 every man has a property in his own person

177 00:09:08,290 --> 00:09:11,780 this nobody has any right to but himself

178 00:09:11,780 --> 00:09:13,660 the labor of his body

179 00:09:13,660 --> 00:09:15,650 the work of his hands

180 00:09:15,650 --> 00:09:19,260 we may say are properly his

181 00:09:19,260 --> 00:09:22,230 so he moves

182 00:09:22,230 --> 00:09:25,270 as the libertarians later of would move 183 00:09:25,270 --> 00:09:26,980 from the idea

184 00:09:26,980 --> 00:09:29,180 that we own ourselves

185 00:09:29,180 --> 00:09:32,250 that we have property in our persons

186 00:09:32,250 --> 00:09:36,080 to the closely connected idea that we own our own labor

187 00:09:36,080 --> 00:09:37,610 and from that

188 00:09:37,610 --> 00:09:39,710 to the further claim

189 00:09:39,710 --> 00:09:43,330 that whatever we mix our labor with

190 00:09:43,330 --> 00:09:45,870 is unowned

191 00:09:45,870 --> 00:09:49,350 becomes our property

192 00:09:49,350 --> 00:09:53,180 whatsoever then he removes out of the state that nature has provided, and left it in,

193 00:09:53,180 --> 00:09:58,400 he has mixed his labor with, and joined to it something that is his own,

194 00:09:58,400 --> 00:10:01,540 and thereby makes it his property

195 00:10:01,540 --> 00:10:04,750 why?

196 00:10:04,750 --> 00:10:06,180 because the labor

197 00:10:06,180 --> 00:10:09,520 is the questionable property of the laborer

198 00:10:09,520 --> 00:10:10,860 and therefore

199 00:10:10,860 --> 00:10:12,310 no one

200 00:10:12,310 --> 00:10:14,609 but the laborer can have a right

201 00:10:14,610 --> 00:10:18,320 to what is joined to or mixed with

202 00:10:18,320 --> 00:10:19,820 his labor

203 00:10:19,820 --> 00:10:22,400 and then he adds this important provision

204 00:10:22,400 --> 00:10:26,350 at least where there is enough and as good left in common

205 00:10:26,350 --> 00:10:29,470 for others.

206 00:10:29,470 --> 00:10:32,550 but we not only

207 00:10:32,550 --> 00:10:35,699 acquire our property in the fruits of the earth

208 00:10:35,700 --> 00:10:37,470 in the deer that we hunt

209 00:10:37,470 --> 00:10:40,750 in the fish that we catch

210 00:10:40,750 --> 00:10:42,890 but also

211 00:10:42,890 --> 00:10:48,350 if we till and plow and enclose the land and grow potatoes

212 00:10:48,350 --> 00:10:50,260 we own not only the potatoes

213 00:10:50,260 --> 00:10:51,610 but the land

214 00:10:51,610 --> 00:10:53,800 the earth

215 00:10:53,800 --> 00:10:59,870 as much land as a man tills, plants, improves, cultivates, and can use

216 00:10:59,870 --> 00:11:03,430 the product of, so much is his property.

217 00:11:03,430 --> 00:11:06,489 he by his labor

218 00:11:06,490 --> 00:11:11,820 encloses it from the commons. so

219 00:11:11,820 --> 00:11:17,870 the idea is that rights are unalienable seems to distance Locke from a libertarian

220 00:11:17,870 --> 00:11:18,410 libertarian

221 00:11:18,410 --> 00:11:20,089 wants to say we have

222 00:11:20,090 --> 00:11:23,670 an absolute property rate in our selves

223 00:11:23,670 --> 00:11:27,400 and therefore we can do with ourselves whatever we want 224 00:11:27,400 --> 00:11:30,920 Locke is not a sturdy ally for that view

225 00:11:30,920 --> 00:11:33,120 in fact he says if you take

226 00:11:33,120 --> 00:11:37,450 natural rights seriously you'll be led to the idea that there are certain

227 00:11:37,450 --> 00:11:41,720 constraints on what we can do with our natural rights, constraints given

228 00:11:41,720 --> 00:11:43,080 either by God

229 00:11:43,080 --> 00:11:50,080 or by reason reflecting on what it means really to be free and really to be free

230 00:11:50,450 --> 00:11:52,220 means recognizing

231 00:11:52,220 --> 00:11:53,950 that our rights are unalienable

232 00:11:53,950 --> 00:11:57,390 so here's the difference between Locke and the libertarians but

233 00:11:57,390 --> 00:11:58,369 when it comes

234 00:11:58,369 --> 00:12:01,830 the Locke's account of private property

235 00:12:01,830 --> 00:12:03,770 he begins to look again

236 00:12:03,770 --> 00:12:06,270 like a pretty good ally

237 00:12:06,270 --> 00:12:08,640 because he's argument for private property

238 00:12:08,640 --> 00:12:12,960 begins with the idea that we are the proprietors of our own person

239 00:12:12,960 --> 00:12:16,540 and therefore of our labor and there of the fruits of our labor

240 00:12:16,540 --> 00:12:19,900 including not only the things

241 00:12:19,900 --> 00:12:23,000 we gather

242 00:12:23,000 --> 00:12:24,550 and hunt

243 00:12:24,550 --> 00:12:27,380 in the state of nature

244 00:12:27,380 --> 00:12:34,140 but also we acquire a property right in the land that we enclosed and cultivate and improve

245 00:12:34,140 --> 00:12:37,189 there are some examples that can bring out the

246 00:12:37,190 --> 00:12:40,420 the moral intuition

247 00:12:40,420 --> 00:12:42,140 that our labor

248 00:12:42,140 --> 00:12:45,490 can take something that is unowned

249 00:12:45,490 --> 00:12:48,050 and make it ours

250 00:12:48,050 --> 00:12:54,180 though sometimes there are disputes about this 251 00:12:54,180 --> 00:12:57,400 there's a debate among

252 00:12:57,400 --> 00:13:00,050 rich countries and developing countries

253 00:13:00,050 --> 00:13:04,349 about trade related intellectual property rights

254 00:13:04,350 --> 00:13:05,839 it came to a head recently

255 00:13:05,839 --> 00:13:09,160 over drug patent laws

256 00:13:09,160 --> 00:13:11,829 western countries and especially the united states say

257 00:13:11,830 --> 00:13:14,920 we have a big pharmaceutical industry that develops

258 00:13:14,920 --> 00:13:17,030 new drugs

259 00:13:17,030 --> 00:13:18,750 we want

260 00:13:18,750 --> 00:13:20,540 all countries in the world

261 00:13:20,540 --> 00:13:21,030 to agree

262 00:13:21,030 --> 00:13:25,000 to respect the patents

263 00:13:25,000 --> 00:13:30,010 then there came along the aids crisis in south Africa

264 00:13:30,010 --> 00:13:31,960 and the American 265 00:13:31,960 --> 00:13:34,080 aids drugs

266 00:13:34,080 --> 00:13:37,270 were hugely expensive

267 00:13:37,270 --> 00:13:40,439 far more than could be afforded by most Africans

268 00:13:40,440 --> 00:13:42,520 so the south African government said

269 00:13:42,520 --> 00:13:43,910 we're going to begin

270 00:13:43,910 --> 00:13:46,189 to buy a generic version

271 00:13:46,190 --> 00:13:48,270 of the AIDS

272 00:13:48,270 --> 00:13:50,970 antiretroviral drug

273 00:13:50,970 --> 00:13:53,970 at a tiny fraction of the cost

274 00:13:53,970 --> 00:13:57,000 because we can find an Indian manufacturing

275 00:13:57,000 --> 00:13:57,690 company

276 00:13:57,690 --> 00:14:01,440 that figures out how the thing is made

277 00:14:01,440 --> 00:14:02,440 and

278 00:14:02,440 --> 00:14:03,630 produces it

279 00:14:03,630 --> 00:14:06,949 and for a tiny fraction of the cost we can save lives if we

280 00:14:06,949 --> 00:14:09,040 don't respect that patent

281 00:14:09,040 --> 00:14:11,380 and then the American government said

282 00:14:11,380 --> 00:14:12,959 no here's a company

283 00:14:12,959 --> 00:14:16,729 that invested research

284 00:14:16,730 --> 00:14:18,200 and created this

285 00:14:18,200 --> 00:14:19,080 drug

286 00:14:19,080 --> 00:14:21,090 you can just

287 00:14:21,090 --> 00:14:22,710 start mass-producing

288 00:14:22,710 --> 00:14:23,960 these drugs

289 00:14:23,960 --> 00:14:25,649 without paying the licensing fee

290 00:14:25,649 --> 00:14:30,380 so there was a dispute

291 00:14:30,380 --> 00:14:36,660 the US and the pharmaceutical companies sued the south African government to try to prevent

292 00:14:36,660 --> 00:14:38,050 their buying the cheap

293 00:14:38,050 --> 00:14:38,729 generic

294 00:14:38,730 --> 00:14:39,800 this they saw it,

295 00:14:39,800 --> 00:14:41,670 pirated version

296 00:14:41,670 --> 00:14:44,069 of an aids drug

297 00:14:44,070 --> 00:14:45,750 and eventually

298 00:14:45,750 --> 00:14:49,130 the pharmaceutical industry gave in

299 00:14:49,130 --> 00:14:49,649 and said

300 00:14:49,649 --> 00:14:53,800 all right you can do that but this dispute about what the rules

301 00:14:53,800 --> 00:14:55,459 of property

302 00:14:55,460 --> 00:14:58,130 should be of intellectual property

303 00:14:58,130 --> 00:15:00,490 of drug patenting

304 00:15:00,490 --> 00:15:01,499 in a way

305 00:15:01,499 --> 00:15:04,930 is the last frontier of the state of nature

306 00:15:04,930 --> 00:15:08,810 because among nations where there is no uniform law 307 00:15:08,810 --> 00:15:11,270 of patent rights and property rights

308 00:15:11,270 --> 00:15:13,069 it's up for grabs

309 00:15:13,070 --> 00:15:15,490 until by some act of consent

310 00:15:15,490 --> 00:15:18,220 some international agreement

311 00:15:18,220 --> 00:15:20,820 people enter into

312 00:15:20,820 --> 00:15:22,620 some settled

313 00:15:22,620 --> 00:15:26,410 rules.

314 00:15:26,410 --> 00:15:27,880 what about

315 00:15:27,880 --> 00:15:29,270 Locke's account of

316 00:15:29,270 --> 00:15:30,870 private property

317 00:15:30,870 --> 00:15:32,950 and how it can arise

318 00:15:32,950 --> 00:15:36,350 before government and before law comes on the scene

319 00:15:36,350 --> 00:15:39,900 is it successful?

320 00:15:39,900 --> 00:15:41,430 how many think

321 00:15:41,430 --> 00:15:46,589 it's pretty persuasive?

322 00:15:46,590 --> 00:15:47,850 how many

323 00:15:47,850 --> 00:15:50,790 don't find it persuasive?

324 00:15:50,790 --> 00:15:53,530 now let's hear from some critics

325 00:15:53,530 --> 00:15:56,150 what is wrong with Locke's account

326 00:15:56,150 --> 00:15:59,209 of how private property can arise

327 00:15:59,210 --> 00:16:03,230 without consent

328 00:16:03,230 --> 00:16:04,759 I think it's justifies

329 00:16:04,759 --> 00:16:08,680 European cultural norms as far as you look at

330 00:16:08,680 --> 00:16:11,919 how native Americans may not cultivated American land

331 00:16:11,919 --> 00:16:14,189 by their arrival

332 00:16:14,190 --> 00:16:14,759 in the America's

333 00:16:14,759 --> 00:16:16,800 that

334 00:16:16,800 --> 00:16:20,719 that contributed to the development of America which would have otherwise necessarily happened

335 00:16:20,720 --> 00:16:23,840 then or by that specific group

336 00:16:23,840 --> 00:16:28,430 so you think that this defense this defense of private property in land

337 00:16:28,430 --> 00:16:32,108 yes because it complicate original acquisitions if you

338 00:16:32,109 --> 00:16:34,410 only site the arrival of

339 00:16:34,410 --> 00:16:35,579 foreigners that cultivated the land

340 00:16:35,580 --> 00:16:38,430 I see, and what's your name?

341 00:16:38,430 --> 00:16:39,829 Rachelle

342 00:16:39,830 --> 00:16:42,390 Rachelle? Rachelle says this account of how property

343 00:16:42,390 --> 00:16:45,060 arises

344 00:16:45,060 --> 00:16:46,020 would fit

345 00:16:46,020 --> 00:16:47,550 what was going on

346 00:16:47,550 --> 00:16:50,270 in north America

347 00:16:50,270 --> 00:16:52,780 during the time of the

348 00:16:52,780 --> 00:16:56,290 settlement, the European settlement

349 00:16:56,290 --> 00:16:57,689 do you think

350 00:16:57,689 --> 00:17:00,050 Rochelle, that it's

351 00:17:00,050 --> 00:17:01,880 it's a way of defending

352 00:17:01,880 --> 00:17:04,589 the appropriation of the land

353 00:17:04,589 --> 00:17:05,948 indeed, because he is

354 00:17:05,949 --> 00:17:08,250 also

355 00:17:08,250 --> 00:17:11,849 you know, justifying the glorious revolution, so I don't think it's inconceivable

356 00:17:11,849 --> 00:17:13,230 that he's also

357 00:17:13,230 --> 00:17:15,980 justifying colonization as well

358 00:17:15,980 --> 00:17:18,950 well that's an interesting

359 00:17:18,950 --> 00:17:20,230 historical suggestion

360 00:17:20,230 --> 00:17:23,790 and I think there's a lot to be said for it

361 00:17:23,790 --> 00:17:27,520 what do you think of the validity of his argument though?

362 00:17:27,520 --> 00:17:28,770 because if you're right

363 00:17:28,770 --> 00:17:33,620 that this would justify the taking of land in north America

364 00:17:33,620 --> 00:17:38,030 from native Americans who didn't enclose it,

365 00:17:38,030 --> 00:17:40,190 if it's a good argument

366 00:17:40,190 --> 00:17:44,360 then Locke's given us a justification for that if it's a bad argument

367 00:17:44,360 --> 00:17:46,620 then Locke's given us

368 00:17:46,620 --> 00:17:48,139 a mere rationalization

369 00:17:48,139 --> 00:17:51,729 it is morally indefensible

370 00:17:51,730 --> 00:17:57,470 I'm leaning to the second one. You're leaning to the second one, but that's my opinion as well

371 00:17:57,470 --> 00:17:58,960 alright

372 00:17:58,960 --> 00:18:01,040 let's hear

373 00:18:01,040 --> 00:18:05,750 if there's a defender of Locke’s account of private property

374 00:18:05,750 --> 00:18:10,270 and it would be interesting if they could address Rachelle's

375 00:18:10,270 --> 00:18:13,139 worried that this is just a way of defending the

376 00:18:13,140 --> 00:18:16,990 the appropriation of land by the American colonists

377 00:18:16,990 --> 00:18:19,790 from the native Americans who didn't enclose it

378 00:18:19,790 --> 00:18:22,740 is there someone who will defend Locke

379 00:18:22,740 --> 00:18:27,510 on that point?

380 00:18:27,510 --> 00:18:29,510 you're ready are you going to defend Locke?

381 00:18:29,510 --> 00:18:34,110 but you're you're accusing him of justifying the European basically massacre of the native

382 00:18:34,110 --> 00:18:34,850 Americans

383 00:18:34,850 --> 00:18:39,350 but who says he's defending it maybe the European colonization isn't right

384 00:18:39,350 --> 00:18:45,540 you know maybe it's the state of war that he talked about in his second treatise, you know

385 00:18:45,540 --> 00:18:49,178 so the war is between the native Americans

386 00:18:49,179 --> 00:18:50,520 and the

387 00:18:50,520 --> 00:18:53,410 colonists, the settlers

388 00:18:53,410 --> 00:18:56,520 that might have been a state of war

389 00:18:56,520 --> 00:18:58,490 that we can only emerged from 390 00:18:58,490 --> 00:19:00,980 by an agreement or an act of consent

391 00:19:00,980 --> 00:19:04,010 and that's what would have been required

392 00:19:04,010 --> 00:19:08,280 yeah and both sides would have to agree to and carry out and everything

393 00:19:08,280 --> 00:19:09,379 but what about

394 00:19:09,380 --> 00:19:11,360 and what's your name? Dan.

395 00:19:11,360 --> 00:19:13,360 Dan, what about

396 00:19:13,360 --> 00:19:14,369 Rachelle's says

397 00:19:14,369 --> 00:19:15,810 this argument

398 00:19:15,810 --> 00:19:19,600 in section twenty seven and then in thirty two

399 00:19:19,600 --> 00:19:23,459 about appropriating land

400 00:19:23,460 --> 00:19:27,210 that argument if it's valid would justify

401 00:19:27,210 --> 00:19:28,669 the settlers

402 00:19:28,669 --> 00:19:31,260 appropriating that land and excluding

403 00:19:31,260 --> 00:19:32,370 others from it 404 00:19:32,370 --> 00:19:34,590 you think that argument’s a good argument?

405 00:19:34,590 --> 00:19:41,590 well does it kind of imply that the native Americans hadn't already done that?

406 00:19:42,540 --> 00:19:47,100 well the native Americans as hunter gatherers didn't actually enclose

407 00:19:47,100 --> 00:19:49,760 enclose land so I think Rochelle

408 00:19:49,760 --> 00:19:52,210 is on to something there

409 00:19:52,210 --> 00:19:53,140 what I wanted

410 00:19:53,140 --> 00:19:53,920 I

411 00:19:53,920 --> 00:19:59,160 go ahead Dan. At the same time he's saying that just by picking an acorn or taking a apple or

412 00:19:59,160 --> 00:20:02,200 maybe killing of buffalo on a certain amount of land

413 00:20:02,200 --> 00:20:06,690 that makes it yours because it's your labor and that's your labor would enclose that land

414 00:20:06,690 --> 00:20:07,550 so

415 00:20:07,550 --> 00:20:10,270 by that definition maybe they didn't have fences

416 00:20:10,270 --> 00:20:11,470 around

417 00:20:11,470 --> 00:20:12,820 little plots of land but didn't

418 00:20:12,820 --> 00:20:13,889 they were using it

419 00:20:13,889 --> 00:20:17,040 so by Locke's definitions, so maybe by Locke's definition

420 00:20:17,040 --> 00:20:19,850 the native Americans could have claimed a property rights

421 00:20:19,850 --> 00:20:23,539 in the land itself but they just didn't have Locke on their side

422 00:20:23,539 --> 00:20:24,710 as she points out. good

423 00:20:24,710 --> 00:20:26,000 okay that's good

424 00:20:26,000 --> 00:20:31,169 One more defender of Locke

425 00:20:31,169 --> 00:20:35,240 well I mean just to defend Locke, he does say there are

426 00:20:35,240 --> 00:20:40,110 some times in which you can't take another person's land for example you can't acquire land

427 00:20:40,110 --> 00:20:44,649 that is common property to people and in terms of American Indians I feel like they already have

428 00:20:44,650 --> 00:20:46,140 civilizations themselves

429 00:20:46,140 --> 00:20:48,670 and they were using land in common so it's kind of like 430 00:20:48,670 --> 00:20:51,140 an analogy to what he was talking about with like the

431 00:20:51,140 --> 00:20:53,310 common English property

432 00:20:53,310 --> 00:20:57,830 you can't take land that everyone has in common. That's very interesting

433 00:20:57,830 --> 00:20:59,149 and you can't take land

434 00:20:59,150 --> 00:21:03,700 unless you make sure that there's as much land as possible enough for other people take as

435 00:21:03,700 --> 00:21:04,790 well

436 00:21:04,790 --> 00:21:06,430 so if you're taking common,

437 00:21:06,430 --> 00:21:09,620 so you have to make sure whenever you take land or

438 00:21:09,620 --> 00:21:13,889 that there's enough let for other people to use

439 00:21:13,890 --> 00:21:15,740 that's just as good as the land that you took

440 00:21:15,740 --> 00:21:17,760 That's true, Locke says there has to be this

441 00:21:17,760 --> 00:21:20,660 right to private property in the earth is subject

442 00:21:20,660 --> 00:21:25,130 to the provision that there be as much and as good left for others

443 00:21:25,130 --> 00:21:27,380 what's your name. I'm Fang

444 00:21:27,380 --> 00:21:31,690 So Fang in a way agrees with Dan that maybe there is a claim within Locke's framework

445 00:21:31,690 --> 00:21:33,770 that could be developed

446 00:21:33,770 --> 00:21:38,830 on behalf of the native Americans

447 00:21:38,830 --> 00:21:42,580 here's the further question,

448 00:21:42,580 --> 00:21:48,320 if the right to private property is natural not conventional,

449 00:21:48,320 --> 00:21:50,408 if it's something

450 00:21:50,409 --> 00:21:54,620 that we acquire even before we agree to government

451 00:21:54,620 --> 00:22:01,620 how does that right constrain what the legitimate government can do

452 00:22:04,700 --> 00:22:07,400 in order for finally to see,

453 00:22:07,400 --> 00:22:10,150 whether Locke is an ally

454 00:22:10,150 --> 00:22:12,750 or potentially

455 00:22:12,750 --> 00:22:14,040 a critic

456 00:22:14,040 --> 00:22:16,320 of the libertarian idea 457 00:22:16,320 --> 00:22:17,990 of the state

458 00:22:17,990 --> 00:22:20,860 we have to ask what becomes of our natural rights

459 00:22:20,860 --> 00:22:23,399 once we enter into society

460 00:22:23,400 --> 00:22:28,840 we know that the way we enter into society is by consent by agreement

461 00:22:28,840 --> 00:22:33,230 to leave the state of nature and to be governed by the majority

462 00:22:33,230 --> 00:22:36,520 and by a system of laws, human laws

463 00:22:36,520 --> 00:22:40,420 but those human laws

464 00:22:40,420 --> 00:22:44,060 our only legitimate

465 00:22:44,060 --> 00:22:45,879 if they respect

466 00:22:45,880 --> 00:22:47,410 our natural rights

467 00:22:47,410 --> 00:22:49,340 if they respect

468 00:22:49,340 --> 00:22:54,799 our inalienable rights to life liberty and property

469 00:22:54,799 --> 00:22:56,059 No

470 00:22:56,059 --> 00:22:57,620 parliament

471 00:22:57,620 --> 00:22:59,489 no legislature

472 00:22:59,490 --> 00:23:01,000 however democratic

473 00:23:01,000 --> 00:23:03,320 its credentials

474 00:23:03,320 --> 00:23:05,639 can legitimately

475 00:23:05,640 --> 00:23:06,870 violate

476 00:23:06,870 --> 00:23:09,840 our natural rights.

477 00:23:09,840 --> 00:23:12,560 this idea

478 00:23:12,560 --> 00:23:15,740 that no law can violate our right

479 00:23:15,740 --> 00:23:19,140 to life liberty and property would seem

480 00:23:19,140 --> 00:23:20,510 to support

481 00:23:20,510 --> 00:23:25,190 the idea of a government so limited

482 00:23:25,190 --> 00:23:28,320 that it would gladden the heart of the libertarian

483 00:23:28,320 --> 00:23:30,210 after all

484 00:23:30,210 --> 00:23:31,860 but 485 00:23:31,860 --> 00:23:35,419 those hearts should not be so quickly gladdened

486 00:23:35,420 --> 00:23:37,800 because even though

487 00:23:37,800 --> 00:23:38,889 for Locke

488 00:23:38,890 --> 00:23:42,120 the law of nature persists

489 00:23:42,120 --> 00:23:44,790 once government arrived

490 00:23:44,790 --> 00:23:46,520 even though Locke

491 00:23:46,520 --> 00:23:48,789 insists on limited government

492 00:23:48,789 --> 00:23:49,990 government limited

493 00:23:49,990 --> 00:23:52,389 by the end for which it was created

494 00:23:52,389 --> 00:23:54,330 namely the preservation of property

495 00:23:54,330 --> 00:23:55,649 even so

496 00:23:55,650 --> 00:23:57,429 there's an important sense

497 00:23:57,429 --> 00:23:58,180 in which

498 00:23:58,180 --> 00:24:01,570 what counts as my property

499 00:24:01,570 --> 00:24:03,970 what counts

500 00:24:03,970 --> 00:24:05,320 as respecting

501 00:24:05,320 --> 00:24:08,200 my life and liberty

502 00:24:08,200 --> 00:24:10,990 are for the government

503 00:24:10,990 --> 00:24:15,330 to define

504 00:24:15,330 --> 00:24:17,970 that there be property

505 00:24:17,970 --> 00:24:20,120 that there be respect

506 00:24:20,120 --> 00:24:24,250 for life and liberty

507 00:24:24,250 --> 00:24:26,970 is what limits government

508 00:24:26,970 --> 00:24:31,020 but what counts

509 00:24:31,020 --> 00:24:34,790 as respecting my life

510 00:24:34,790 --> 00:24:38,120 and respecting my property

511 00:24:38,120 --> 00:24:40,260 that is for governments

512 00:24:40,260 --> 00:24:44,020 to decide and define

513 00:24:44,020 --> 00:24:45,820 how can that be 514 00:24:45,820 --> 00:24:49,260 is Locke contradicting himself

515 00:24:49,260 --> 00:24:54,060 or is there an important distinction

516 00:24:54,060 --> 00:24:59,899 here in order to answer that question which will decide Locke's fit with the libertarian view

517 00:24:59,900 --> 00:25:01,659 we need to look closely

518 00:25:01,659 --> 00:25:03,710 at what legitimate government

519 00:25:03,710 --> 00:25:04,990 looks like for Locke,

520 00:25:04,990 --> 00:25:11,990 and we turn to that next time.