Funding for This Program Is Provided By

1 00:00:04,110 --> 00:00:08,290 funding for this program is provided by2 00:00:08,290 --> 00:00:15,290 additional funding provided by3 00:00:31,859 --> 00:00:38,859 today we turn to John Locke4 00:00:39,430 --> 00:00:42,269 on the face of it5 00:00:42,270 --> 00:00:45,180 Locke is a powerful ally6 00:00:45,180 --> 00:00:47,420 of the libertarian7 00:00:47,420 --> 00:00:48,710 first8 00:00:48,710 --> 00:00:51,040 he believes,9 00:00:51,040 --> 00:00:54,940 as libertarians today maintain10 00:00:54,940 --> 00:00:59,930 that there are certain fundamental individual rights11 00:00:59,930 --> 00:01:01,520 that are so important12 00:01:01,520 --> 00:01:03,690 that no government13 00:01:03,690 --> 00:01:08,670 even a representative government even a democratically elected government14 00:01:08,670 --> 00:01:12,440 can override them. 15 00:01:12,440 --> 00:01:14,110 not only that16 00:01:14,110 --> 00:01:16,090 he believes17 00:01:16,090 --> 00:01:19,159 that those fundamental rights include18 00:01:19,159 --> 00:01:23,200 a natural right19 00:01:23,200 --> 00:01:29,290 to life liberty and property20 00:01:29,290 --> 00:01:30,240 and21 00:01:30,240 --> 00:01:32,160 furthermore he argues22 00:01:32,160 --> 00:01:37,050 that the right to property23 00:01:37,050 --> 00:01:39,350 is not just the creation24 00:01:39,350 --> 00:01:41,000 of government25 00:01:41,000 --> 00:01:42,520 or of law26 00:01:42,520 --> 00:01:46,860 the right to property is a natural right27 00:01:46,860 --> 00:01:47,760 in the sense that28 00:01:47,760 --> 00:01:51,550 it is pre-political29 00:01:51,550 --> 00:01:53,509 it is a right30 00:01:53,510 --> 00:01:57,390 that attaches to individuals31 00:01:57,390 --> 00:01:59,549 as human beings32 00:01:59,549 --> 00:02:02,630 even before government comes on the scene33 00:02:02,630 --> 00:02:08,288 even before parliaments and legislatures enact laws to define rights34 00:02:08,288 --> 00:02:10,478 and to enforce them35 00:02:10,479 --> 00:02:12,609 Locke says in order to think about36 00:02:12,609 --> 00:02:15,789 what it means to have a natural right37 00:02:15,789 --> 00:02:17,980 we have to imagine38 00:02:17,980 --> 00:02:21,429 the way things are39 00:02:21,429 --> 00:02:24,199 before government40 00:02:24,199 --> 00:02:26,450 before law41 00:02:26,450 --> 00:02:28,138 and that's what Locke means42 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 liberty44 00:02:39,059 --> 00:02:42,709 human beings are free and equal beings45 00:02:42,709 --> 00:02:46,569 there is no natural hierarchy46 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 be47 00:02:51,459 --> 00:02:53,589 serfs48 00:02:53,589 --> 00:02:57,119 we're free and equal in the state of nature49 00:02:57,119 --> 00:02:59,109 and yet50 00:02:59,109 --> 00:03:00,779 he makes the point51 00:03:00,779 --> 00:03:04,719 but there's a difference between a state of liberty and the state of52 00:03:04,719 --> 00:03:08,959 license53 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 not54 00:03:12,659 --> 00:03:15,469 the kind of law the legislatures enact55 00:03:15,469 --> 00:03:18,888 it's the law of nature56 00:03:18,889 --> 00:03:22,379 and this law of nature57 00:03:22,379 --> 00:03:22,899 constrains58 00:03:22,900 --> 00:03:24,469 what we can do59 00:03:24,469 --> 00:03:25,819 even though we're free60 00:03:25,819 --> 00:03:28,988 even though we're in the state of nature61 00:03:28,989 --> 00:03:33,329 well what are the constraints?62 00:03:33,329 --> 00:03:35,979 the only constraint63 00:03:35,979 --> 00:03:39,029 given by the laws of nature64 00:03:39,029 --> 00:03:40,639 is that65 00:03:40,639 --> 00:03:43,069 the rights we have66 00:03:43,069 --> 00:03:45,509 the national rights we have67 00:03:45,509 --> 00:03:49,429 we can't give up68 00:03:49,430 --> 00:03:53,759 nor can we take them from somebody else69 00:03:53,759 --> 00:03:55,569 under the law of nature I'm not free70 00:03:55,569 --> 00:03:58,298 take somebody else's71 00:03:58,299 --> 00:04:00,699 life or liberty 72 00:04:00,699 --> 00:04:02,839 or property73 00:04:02,839 --> 00:04:04,230 nor am I74 00:04:04,230 --> 00:04:05,828 free75 00:04:05,829 --> 00:04:08,409 to take my own76 00:04:08,409 --> 00:04:12,029 life liberty or property77 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 free79 00:04:15,229 --> 00:04:18,419 to violate the laws of nature, I'm not free to80 00:04:18,418 --> 00:04:19,698 take my own life81 00:04:19,699 --> 00:04:22,569 or to sell myself into slavery82 00:04:22,569 --> 00:04:24,240 or to give to somebody else83 00:04:24,240 --> 00:04:27,030 arbitrary absolute power84 00:04:27,030 --> 00:04:28,619 over me85 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 from88 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 answer90 00:04:45,669 --> 00:04:48,128 for men91 00:04:48,129 --> 00:04:51,029 being all the workmanship92 00:04:51,029 --> 00:04:51,830 of one93 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 property95 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 my98 00:05:09,909 --> 00:05:12,889 natural rights to life liberty and property99 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 all101 00:05:20,319 --> 00:05:21,460 you are102 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 us105 00:05:28,120 --> 00:05:31,449 a prior priority right106 00:05:31,449 --> 00:05:33,189 now you might say that107 00:05:33,189 --> 00:05:38,219 an unsatisfying unconvincing answer at least for those who don't believe in God108 00:05:38,219 --> 00:05:41,430 what did Locke have to say to them109 00:05:41,430 --> 00:05:44,780 well here's where Locke appeals to the idea110 00:05:44,780 --> 00:05:47,159 of reason111 00:05:47,160 --> 00:05:49,939 and this is the idea112 00:05:49,939 --> 00:05:52,030 that if we properly reflect113 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 conclusion115 00:05:57,180 --> 00:06:02,499 that freedom can't just be a matter of doing whatever we want116 00:06:02,499 --> 00:06:04,520 I think this is what Locke means117 00:06:04,520 --> 00:06:06,169 when he says118 00:06:06,169 --> 00:06:10,240 the state of nature has a law of nature to govern it which obliges everyone119 00:06:10,240 --> 00:06:11,770 and reason120 00:06:11,770 --> 00:06:14,568 which is that law121 00:06:14,569 --> 00:06:19,780 teaches all mankind, who will but consult it, that being all equal and independent122 00:06:19,780 --> 00:06:24,839 no one ought to harm another in his life health liberty for possessions123 00:06:24,839 --> 00:06:26,770 this leads124 00:06:26,770 --> 00:06:31,198 to a puzzling paradoxical125 00:06:31,199 --> 00:06:34,529 feature to Locke's account of rights126 00:06:34,529 --> 00:06:36,479 familiar in one sense127 00:06:36,479 --> 00:06:39,930 but strange in another128 00:06:39,930 --> 00:06:41,719 it's the idea129 00:06:41,719 --> 00:06:44,199 that out natural rights are inalienable130 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 way132 00:06:49,930 --> 00:06:52,599 to sell them133 00:06:52,599 --> 00:06:54,169 consider an airline ticket134 00:06:54,169 --> 00:06:56,389 airline tickets are nontransferable135 00:06:56,389 --> 00:07:00,889 or tickets to the patriots or to the red sox136 00:07:00,889 --> 00:07:03,810 nontransferable tickets137 00:07:03,810 --> 00:07:06,259 are unalienable138 00:07:06,259 --> 00:07:07,739 I own them139 00:07:07,739 --> 00:07:09,340 in the limited sense140 00:07:09,340 --> 00:07:13,179 that I can use them for myself but I can't trade them away141 00:07:13,180 --> 00:07:18,609 so in one sense an unalienable right, a nontransferable right142 00:07:18,609 --> 00:07:21,630 makes something I own143 00:07:21,630 --> 00:07:22,620 less144 00:07:22,620 --> 00:07:25,589 fully mine145 00:07:25,589 --> 00:07:27,789 but in another sense146 00:07:27,789 --> 00:07:29,370 of unalienable147 00:07:29,370 --> 00:07:31,580 rights148 00:07:31,580 --> 00:07:37,039 especially where we're thinking about life liberty and property149 00:07:37,039 --> 00:07:42,520 for a right to be unalienable, makes it more deeply more profoundly mine150 00:07:42,520 --> 00:07:44,150 and that's Locke's151 00:07:44,150 --> 00:07:45,250 sense152 00:07:45,250 --> 00:07:47,469 of unalienable153 00:07:47,469 --> 00:07:51,520 we see it in the American declaration of independence Thomas Jefferson154 00:07:51,520 --> 00:07:54,469 drew on this idea of Locke 155 00:07:54,469 --> 00:07:56,050 unalienable rights156 00:07:56,050 --> 00:07:57,650 to life liberty157 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 rights159 00:08:04,889 --> 00:08:08,139 rights that are so160 00:08:08,139 --> 00:08:11,479 essentially mine161 00:08:11,479 --> 00:08:17,520 that even I can't trade them away or give them up162 00:08:17,520 --> 00:08:21,030 so these are the rights we have in the state of nature163 00:08:21,030 --> 00:08:24,089 before there is any government164 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 slavery165 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 force166 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 case168 00:08:42,590 --> 00:08:45,020 that private property169 00:08:45,020 --> 00:08:47,350 can arise170 00:08:47,350 --> 00:08:50,850 even before there is any government171 00:08:50,850 --> 00:08:54,580 how can there be a right to private property172 00:08:54,580 --> 00:08:56,830 even before there is any173 00:08:56,830 --> 00:08:59,440 government?174 00:08:59,440 --> 00:09:01,730 Locke's famous answer175 00:09:01,730 --> 00:09:04,330 comes in section twenty seven176 00:09:04,330 --> 00:09:08,290 every man has a property in his own person177 00:09:08,290 --> 00:09:11,780 this nobody has any right to but himself178 00:09:11,780 --> 00:09:13,660 the labor of his body179 00:09:13,660 --> 00:09:15,650 the work of his hands180 00:09:15,650 --> 00:09:19,260 we may say are properly his181 00:09:19,260 --> 00:09:22,230 so he moves182 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 idea184 00:09:26,980 --> 00:09:29,180 that we own ourselves185 00:09:29,180 --> 00:09:32,250 that we have property in our persons186 00:09:32,250 --> 00:09:36,080 to the closely connected idea that we own our own labor187 00:09:36,080 --> 00:09:37,610 and from that188 00:09:37,610 --> 00:09:39,710 to the further claim189 00:09:39,710 --> 00:09:43,330 that whatever we mix our labor with190 00:09:43,330 --> 00:09:45,870 is unowned191 00:09:45,870 --> 00:09:49,350 becomes our property192 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 property195 00:10:01,540 --> 00:10:04,750 why?196 00:10:04,750 --> 00:10:06,180 because the labor197 00:10:06,180 --> 00:10:09,520 is the questionable property of the laborer198 00:10:09,520 --> 00:10:10,860 and therefore 199 00:10:10,860 --> 00:10:12,310 no one200 00:10:12,310 --> 00:10:14,609 but the laborer can have a right201 00:10:14,610 --> 00:10:18,320 to what is joined to or mixed with202 00:10:18,320 --> 00:10:19,820 his labor203 00:10:19,820 --> 00:10:22,400 and then he adds this important provision204 00:10:22,400 --> 00:10:26,350 at least where there is enough and as good left in common205 00:10:26,350 --> 00:10:29,470 for others.206 00:10:29,470 --> 00:10:32,550 but we not only207 00:10:32,550 --> 00:10:35,699 acquire our property in the fruits of the earth208 00:10:35,700 --> 00:10:37,470 in the deer that we hunt209 00:10:37,470 --> 00:10:40,750 in the fish that we catch210 00:10:40,750 --> 00:10:42,890 but also211 00:10:42,890 --> 00:10:48,350 if we till and plow and enclose the land and grow potatoes212 00:10:48,350 --> 00:10:50,260 we own not only the potatoes213 00:10:50,260 --> 00:10:51,610 but the land214 00:10:51,610 --> 00:10:53,800 the earth215 00:10:53,800 --> 00:10:59,870 as much land as a man tills, plants, improves, cultivates, and can use216 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 labor218 00:11:06,490 --> 00:11:11,820 encloses it from the commons. so219 00:11:11,820 --> 00:11:17,870 the idea is that rights are unalienable seems to distance Locke from a libertarian220 00:11:17,870 --> 00:11:18,410 libertarian221 00:11:18,410 --> 00:11:20,089 wants to say we have222 00:11:20,090 --> 00:11:23,670 an absolute property rate in our selves223 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 view225 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 certain227 00:11:37,450 --> 00:11:41,720 constraints on what we can do with our natural rights, constraints given228 00:11:41,720 --> 00:11:43,080 either by God229 00:11:43,080 --> 00:11:50,080 or by reason reflecting on what it means really to be free and really to be free230 00:11:50,450 --> 00:11:52,220 means recognizing231 00:11:52,220 --> 00:11:53,950 that our rights are unalienable232 00:11:53,950 --> 00:11:57,390 so here's the difference between Locke and the libertarians but233 00:11:57,390 --> 00:11:58,369 when it comes234 00:11:58,369 --> 00:12:01,830 the Locke's account of private property235 00:12:01,830 --> 00:12:03,770 he begins to look again236 00:12:03,770 --> 00:12:06,270 like a pretty good ally237 00:12:06,270 --> 00:12:08,640 because he's argument for private property238 00:12:08,640 --> 00:12:12,960 begins with the idea that we are the proprietors of our own person239 00:12:12,960 --> 00:12:16,540 and therefore of our labor and there of the fruits of our labor240 00:12:16,540 --> 00:12:19,900 including not only the things241 00:12:19,900 --> 00:12:23,000 we gather242 00:12:23,000 --> 00:12:24,550 and hunt243 00:12:24,550 --> 00:12:27,380 in the state of nature244 00:12:27,380 --> 00:12:34,140 but also we acquire a property right in the land that we enclosed and cultivate and improve245 00:12:34,140 --> 00:12:37,189 there are some examples that can bring out the246 00:12:37,190 --> 00:12:40,420 the moral intuition247 00:12:40,420 --> 00:12:42,140 that our labor248 00:12:42,140 --> 00:12:45,490 can take something that is unowned249 00:12:45,490 --> 00:12:48,050 and make it ours250 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 among252 00:12:57,400 --> 00:13:00,050 rich countries and developing countries253 00:13:00,050 --> 00:13:04,349 about trade related intellectual property rights254 00:13:04,350 --> 00:13:05,839 it came to a head recently255 00:13:05,839 --> 00:13:09,160 over drug patent laws256 00:13:09,160 --> 00:13:11,829 western countries and especially the united states say257 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 drugs259 00:13:17,030 --> 00:13:18,750 we want260 00:13:18,750 --> 00:13:20,540 all countries in the world261 00:13:20,540 --> 00:13:21,030 to agree262 00:13:21,030 --> 00:13:25,000 to respect the patents263 00:13:25,000 --> 00:13:30,010 then there came along the aids crisis in south Africa264 00:13:30,010 --> 00:13:31,960 and the American 265 00:13:31,960 --> 00:13:34,080 aids drugs266 00:13:34,080 --> 00:13:37,270 were hugely expensive267 00:13:37,270 --> 00:13:40,439 far more than could be afforded by most Africans268 00:13:40,440 --> 00:13:42,520 so the south African government said269 00:13:42,520 --> 00:13:43,910 we're going to begin270 00:13:43,910 --> 00:13:46,189 to buy a generic version271 00:13:46,190 --> 00:13:48,270 of the AIDS272 00:13:48,270 --> 00:13:50,970 antiretroviral drug273 00:13:50,970 --> 00:13:53,970 at a tiny fraction of the cost274 00:13:53,970 --> 00:13:57,000 because we can find an Indian manufacturing275 00:13:57,000 --> 00:13:57,690 company276 00:13:57,690 --> 00:14:01,440 that figures out how the thing is made277 00:14:01,440 --> 00:14:02,440 and278 00:14:02,440 --> 00:14:03,630 produces it279 00:14:03,630 --> 00:14:06,949 and for a tiny fraction of the cost we can save lives if we280 00:14:06,949 --> 00:14:09,040 don't respect that patent281 00:14:09,040 --> 00:14:11,380 and then the American government said282 00:14:11,380 --> 00:14:12,959 no here's a company283 00:14:12,959 --> 00:14:16,729 that invested research284 00:14:16,730 --> 00:14:18,200 and created this285 00:14:18,200 --> 00:14:19,080 drug286 00:14:19,080 --> 00:14:21,090 you can just287 00:14:21,090 --> 00:14:22,710 start mass-producing 288 00:14:22,710 --> 00:14:23,960 these drugs289 00:14:23,960 --> 00:14:25,649 without paying the licensing fee290 00:14:25,649 --> 00:14:30,380 so there was a dispute291 00:14:30,380 --> 00:14:36,660 the US and the pharmaceutical companies sued the south African government to try to prevent292 00:14:36,660 --> 00:14:38,050 their buying the cheap293 00:14:38,050 --> 00:14:38,729 generic294 00:14:38,730 --> 00:14:39,800 this they saw it,295 00:14:39,800 --> 00:14:41,670 pirated version296 00:14:41,670 --> 00:14:44,069 of an aids drug297 00:14:44,070 --> 00:14:45,750 and eventually298 00:14:45,750 --> 00:14:49,130 the pharmaceutical industry gave in299 00:14:49,130 --> 00:14:49,649 and said300 00:14:49,649 --> 00:14:53,800 all right you can do that but this dispute about what the rules301 00:14:53,800 --> 00:14:55,459 of property302 00:14:55,460 --> 00:14:58,130 should be of intellectual property303 00:14:58,130 --> 00:15:00,490 of drug patenting304 00:15:00,490 --> 00:15:01,499 in a way305 00:15:01,499 --> 00:15:04,930 is the last frontier of the state of nature306 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 rights308 00:15:11,270 --> 00:15:13,069 it's up for grabs309 00:15:13,070 --> 00:15:15,490 until by some act of consent310 00:15:15,490 --> 00:15:18,220 some international agreement311 00:15:18,220 --> 00:15:20,820 people enter into312 00:15:20,820 --> 00:15:22,620 some settled313 00:15:22,620 --> 00:15:26,410 rules.314 00:15:26,410 --> 00:15:27,880 what about315 00:15:27,880 --> 00:15:29,270 Locke's account of316 00:15:29,270 --> 00:15:30,870 private property317 00:15:30,870 --> 00:15:32,950 and how it can arise318 00:15:32,950 --> 00:15:36,350 before government and before law comes on the scene319 00:15:36,350 --> 00:15:39,900 is it successful?320 00:15:39,900 --> 00:15:41,430 how many think321 00:15:41,430 --> 00:15:46,589 it's pretty persuasive?322 00:15:46,590 --> 00:15:47,850 how many323 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 critics325 00:15:53,530 --> 00:15:56,150 what is wrong with Locke's account326 00:15:56,150 --> 00:15:59,209 of how private property can arise327 00:15:59,210 --> 00:16:03,230 without consent328 00:16:03,230 --> 00:16:04,759 I think it's justifies329 00:16:04,759 --> 00:16:08,680 European cultural norms as far as you look at330 00:16:08,680 --> 00:16:11,919 how native Americans may not cultivated American land331 00:16:11,919 --> 00:16:14,189 by their arrival332 00:16:14,190 --> 00:16:14,759 in the America's 333 00:16:14,759 --> 00:16:16,800 that334 00:16:16,800 --> 00:16:20,719 that contributed to the development of America which would have otherwise necessarily happened335 00:16:20,720 --> 00:16:23,840 then or by that specific group336 00:16:23,840 --> 00:16:28,430 so you think that this defense this defense of private property in land337 00:16:28,430 --> 00:16:32,108 yes because it complicate original acquisitions if you338 00:16:32,109 --> 00:16:34,410 only site the arrival of339 00:16:34,410 --> 00:16:35,579 foreigners that cultivated the land340 00:16:35,580 --> 00:16:38,430 I see, and what's your name?341 00:16:38,430 --> 00:16:39,829 Rachelle342 00:16:39,830 --> 00:16:42,390 Rachelle? Rachelle says this account of how property343 00:16:42,390 --> 00:16:45,060 arises344 00:16:45,060 --> 00:16:46,020 would fit345 00:16:46,020 --> 00:16:47,550 what was going on346 00:16:47,550 --> 00:16:50,270 in north America347 00:16:50,270 --> 00:16:52,780 during the time of the348 00:16:52,780 --> 00:16:56,290 settlement, the European settlement349 00:16:56,290 --> 00:16:57,689 do you think350 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 defending352 00:17:01,880 --> 00:17:04,589 the appropriation of the land353 00:17:04,589 --> 00:17:05,948 indeed, because he is 354 00:17:05,949 --> 00:17:08,250 also355 00:17:08,250 --> 00:17:11,849 you know, justifying the glorious revolution, so I don't think it's inconceivable356 00:17:11,849 --> 00:17:13,230 that he's also357 00:17:13,230 --> 00:17:15,980 justifying colonization as well358 00:17:15,980 --> 00:17:18,950 well that's an interesting359 00:17:18,950 --> 00:17:20,230 historical suggestion360 00:17:20,230 --> 00:17:23,790 and I think there's a lot to be said for it361 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 right363 00:17:28,770 --> 00:17:33,620 that this would justify the taking of land in north America364 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 argument366 00:17:40,190 --> 00:17:44,360 then Locke's given us a justification for that if it's a bad argument367 00:17:44,360 --> 00:17:46,620 then Locke's given us368 00:17:46,620 --> 00:17:48,139 a mere rationalization369 00:17:48,139 --> 00:17:51,729 it is morally indefensible370 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 well371 00:17:57,470 --> 00:17:58,960 alright372 00:17:58,960 --> 00:18:01,040 let's hear373 00:18:01,040 --> 00:18:05,750 if there's a defender of Locke’s account of private property374 00:18:05,750 --> 00:18:10,270 and it would be interesting if they could address Rachelle's375 00:18:10,270 --> 00:18:13,139 worried that this is just a way of defending the376 00:18:13,140 --> 00:18:16,990 the appropriation of land by the American colonists377 00:18:16,990 --> 00:18:19,790 from the native Americans who didn't enclose it378 00:18:19,790 --> 00:18:22,740 is there someone who will defend Locke379 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 native382 00:18:34,110 --> 00:18:34,850 Americans383 00:18:34,850 --> 00:18:39,350 but who says he's defending it maybe the European colonization isn't right384 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 know385 00:18:45,540 --> 00:18:49,178 so the war is between the native Americans386 00:18:49,179 --> 00:18:50,520 and the387 00:18:50,520 --> 00:18:53,410 colonists, the settlers388 00:18:53,410 --> 00:18:56,520 that might have been a state of war389 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 consent391 00:19:00,980 --> 00:19:04,010 and that's what would have been required392 00:19:04,010 --> 00:19:08,280 yeah and both sides would have to agree to and carry out and everything393 00:19:08,280 --> 00:19:09,379 but what about394 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 about396 00:19:13,360 --> 00:19:14,369 Rachelle's says397 00:19:14,369 --> 00:19:15,810 this argument398 00:19:15,810 --> 00:19:19,600 in section twenty seven and then in thirty two399 00:19:19,600 --> 00:19:23,459 about appropriating land400 00:19:23,460 --> 00:19:27,210 that argument if it's valid would justify401 00:19:27,210 --> 00:19:28,669 the settlers402 00:19:28,669 --> 00:19:31,260 appropriating that land and excluding403 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 enclose407 00:19:47,100 --> 00:19:49,760 enclose land so I think Rochelle408 00:19:49,760 --> 00:19:52,210 is on to something there409 00:19:52,210 --> 00:19:53,140 what I wanted410 00:19:53,140 --> 00:19:53,920 I411 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 or412 00:19:59,160 --> 00:20:02,200 maybe killing of buffalo on a certain amount of land413 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 land414 00:20:06,690 --> 00:20:07,550 so415 00:20:07,550 --> 00:20:10,270 by that definition maybe they didn't have fences416 00:20:10,270 --> 00:20:11,470 around417 00:20:11,470 --> 00:20:12,820 little plots of land but didn't418 00:20:12,820 --> 00:20:13,889 they were using it419 00:20:13,889 --> 00:20:17,040 so by Locke's definitions, so maybe by Locke's definition420 00:20:17,040 --> 00:20:19,850 the native Americans could have claimed a property rights421 00:20:19,850 --> 00:20:23,539 in the land itself but they just didn't have Locke on their side422 00:20:23,539 --> 00:20:24,710 as she points out. good423 00:20:24,710 --> 00:20:26,000 okay that's good424 00:20:26,000 --> 00:20:31,169 One more defender of Locke425 00:20:31,169 --> 00:20:35,240 well I mean just to defend Locke, he does say there are426 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 land427 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 have428 00:20:44,650 --> 00:20:46,140 civilizations themselves429 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 property432 00:20:53,310 --> 00:20:57,830 you can't take land that everyone has in common. That's very interesting433 00:20:57,830 --> 00:20:59,149 and you can't take land434 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 as435 00:21:03,700 --> 00:21:04,790 well436 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 or438 00:21:09,620 --> 00:21:13,889 that there's enough let for other people to use439 00:21:13,890 --> 00:21:15,740 that's just as good as the land that you took440 00:21:15,740 --> 00:21:17,760 That's true, Locke says there has to be this441 00:21:17,760 --> 00:21:20,660 right to private property in the earth is subject442 00:21:20,660 --> 00:21:25,130 to the provision that there be as much and as good left for others443 00:21:25,130 --> 00:21:27,380 what's your name. I'm Fang444 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 framework445 00:21:31,690 --> 00:21:33,770 that could be developed446 00:21:33,770 --> 00:21:38,830 on behalf of the native Americans447 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 something450 00:21:50,409 --> 00:21:54,620 that we acquire even before we agree to government451 00:21:54,620 --> 00:22:01,620 how does that right constrain what the legitimate government can do452 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 ally454 00:22:10,150 --> 00:22:12,750 or potentially455 00:22:12,750 --> 00:22:14,040 a critic456 00:22:14,040 --> 00:22:16,320 of the libertarian idea 457 00:22:16,320 --> 00:22:17,990 of the state458 00:22:17,990 --> 00:22:20,860 we have to ask what becomes of our natural rights459 00:22:20,860 --> 00:22:23,399 once we enter into society460 00:22:23,400 --> 00:22:28,840 we know that the way we enter into society is by consent by agreement461 00:22:28,840 --> 00:22:33,230 to leave the state of nature and to be governed by the majority462 00:22:33,230 --> 00:22:36,520 and by a system of laws, human laws463 00:22:36,520 --> 00:22:40,420 but those human laws464 00:22:40,420 --> 00:22:44,060 our only legitimate465 00:22:44,060 --> 00:22:45,879 if they respect466 00:22:45,880 --> 00:22:47,410 our natural rights467 00:22:47,410 --> 00:22:49,340 if they respect468 00:22:49,340 --> 00:22:54,799 our inalienable rights to life liberty and property469 00:22:54,799 --> 00:22:56,059 No470 00:22:56,059 --> 00:22:57,620 parliament471 00:22:57,620 --> 00:22:59,489 no legislature472 00:22:59,490 --> 00:23:01,000 however democratic473 00:23:01,000 --> 00:23:03,320 its credentials474 00:23:03,320 --> 00:23:05,639 can legitimately475 00:23:05,640 --> 00:23:06,870 violate476 00:23:06,870 --> 00:23:09,840 our natural rights.477 00:23:09,840 --> 00:23:12,560 this idea478 00:23:12,560 --> 00:23:15,740 that no law can violate our right479 00:23:15,740 --> 00:23:19,140 to life liberty and property would seem480 00:23:19,140 --> 00:23:20,510 to support481 00:23:20,510 --> 00:23:25,190 the idea of a government so limited482 00:23:25,190 --> 00:23:28,320 that it would gladden the heart of the libertarian483 00:23:28,320 --> 00:23:30,210 after all484 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 gladdened486 00:23:35,420 --> 00:23:37,800 because even though487 00:23:37,800 --> 00:23:38,889 for Locke488 00:23:38,890 --> 00:23:42,120 the law of nature persists489 00:23:42,120 --> 00:23:44,790 once government arrived490 00:23:44,790 --> 00:23:46,520 even though Locke491 00:23:46,520 --> 00:23:48,789 insists on limited government492 00:23:48,789 --> 00:23:49,990 government limited493 00:23:49,990 --> 00:23:52,389 by the end for which it was created494 00:23:52,389 --> 00:23:54,330 namely the preservation of property495 00:23:54,330 --> 00:23:55,649 even so496 00:23:55,650 --> 00:23:57,429 there's an important sense497 00:23:57,429 --> 00:23:58,180 in which498 00:23:58,180 --> 00:24:01,570 what counts as my property499 00:24:01,570 --> 00:24:03,970 what counts500 00:24:03,970 --> 00:24:05,320 as respecting501 00:24:05,320 --> 00:24:08,200 my life and liberty502 00:24:08,200 --> 00:24:10,990 are for the government503 00:24:10,990 --> 00:24:15,330 to define504 00:24:15,330 --> 00:24:17,970 that there be property505 00:24:17,970 --> 00:24:20,120 that there be respect506 00:24:20,120 --> 00:24:24,250 for life and liberty507 00:24:24,250 --> 00:24:26,970 is what limits government508 00:24:26,970 --> 00:24:31,020 but what counts509 00:24:31,020 --> 00:24:34,790 as respecting my life510 00:24:34,790 --> 00:24:38,120 and respecting my property511 00:24:38,120 --> 00:24:40,260 that is for governments512 00:24:40,260 --> 00:24:44,020 to decide and define513 00:24:44,020 --> 00:24:45,820 how can that be 514 00:24:45,820 --> 00:24:49,260 is Locke contradicting himself515 00:24:49,260 --> 00:24:54,060 or is there an important distinction516 00:24:54,060 --> 00:24:59,899 here in order to answer that question which will decide Locke's fit with the libertarian view517 00:24:59,900 --> 00:25:01,659 we need to look closely518 00:25:01,659 --> 00:25:03,710 at what legitimate government519 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.

Funding for This Program Is Provided By

Details

Download

Copyright

We respect the copyrights and intellectual property rights of all users. All uploaded documents are either original works of the uploader or authorized works of the rightful owners.

Support