Locke's View On Property: Karl Marx And John Locke

1321 Words3 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Compare and contrast john locke & karl marx

Property is an issue that remained highly debated upon by philosophers such as Karl Marx and John Locke in the discussion of the political philosophy of the seventh and eighteenth centuries. These two philosophers have their own individual views of property; Locke believes that the acquisition of property is ‘natural’ and that there exists a right to obtain and keep it, and Marx strongly believes that property should be abolished. Regarding these two political philosophers’ views about property, I believe Locke’s view is more useful for creating and maintaining a peaceful and stable society because (to him) property is natural and contributes to the equality already present in a state of nature. Marx believes that the right to property involves …show more content…

According to Locke, these rights imply the duty to survive, reproduce, and to preserve oneself. I believe Locke’s view on property is useful for creating and maintaining a peaceful society because people have these natural duties in a state of nature, which (according to Locke) brings peace because equality is already present. However, difficulty arises in understanding what Locke means by ‘labor’, and this further complicates Locke’s views of property. According to David P. Ellerman, “Locke interprets ‘one’s labor’ to mean the labor that one owns, not the labor that one performs.” Therefore, Locke states that no quantity or quality of labor is necessary for someone to claim something as property; the ability to do such labor to something makes it one’s property. This analysis of his meaning of the word ‘labor’ aids to the understanding of his views of property and clarifies it further for this …show more content…

One limit focuses on the spoilage of property and the difference between enjoying and using it, “God has given us all things richly…to enjoy…as much as any one [sic] can make use of to any advantage…before it spoils.” Locke states that man was given everything by God so we could enjoy it and have it aid us, but not for it to go to waste. One can gather what he or she needs and what he or she is able to use and enjoy, but whatever amount of property that is beyond one’s capacity to use and enjoy belongs to others. I believe in concordance with Locke that one’s desire to own property to survive is natural, and this need for property in order to live is inherent in history. Following Locke’s beliefs of property, labor, and one’s inert duty to survive, consider the pilgrims’ colonization of the Americas in the fifteen century. In order for the pilgrims to survive and reproduce, they need to create shelter. this could involve, for example, using axes to cut down trees in order to build homes. According to Locke’s beliefs, this creation of homes using tools (that are the property of pilgrims) creates the aspect of property in the New World; those who build the homes own them (or at least those capable of doing so theoretically build their own home) precisely because they can put labor into it. Thus, the desire to own property was inert in the pilgrims; they needed to have homes as part

Show More
Related

  • Democratic Ideals of John Locke

    737 Words  | 2 Pages

    ...s his argument by emphasizing the absolute reason on why property is solely for the use to produce goods and provide services by farming one’s land or building infrastructures; nevertheless the overuse of one’s land exhibits what Locke calls waste, whereas the consumption of goods for the use of trade can result in bartering and wealth. The introduction of wealth creates the motivation for people feel compelled to protect their wealth which leads us back to the concept of entering into a civil or political society for security. Locke believes that civil and political society can ensure the stability, security, and social structure of any given society; but he points out that if the government becomes a tyranny or corrupt only than shall the populace exercise their right to question the authority and overthrow if needed.

    Read More

  • John Locke’s Two Treatises of Government and Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s Social Contract

    1125 Words  | 3 Pages

    What John Locke was concerned about was the lack of limitations on the sovereign authority. During Locke’s time the world was surrounded by the monarch’s constitutional violations of liberty toward the end of the seventeenth century. He believed that people in their natural state enjoy certain natural, inalienable rights, particularly those to life, liberty and property. Locke described a kind of social contract whereby any number of people, who are able to abide by the majority rule, unanimously unite to affect their common purposes. The...

    Read More

  • Hobbes and Locke

    869 Words  | 2 Pages

    ...o self-preservation, and a lack of morals coupled with an inability to establish ownership of property will eventually lead to a state of war. This of course necessitates a ruling state to determine what is good and evil, and to enforce morality and justice. Again Locke claims the opposite, that due to the existence of natural law and an enlightened self-interest, human beings by nature are social and peaceful creatures capable of governing themselves.

    Read More

  • The Beliefs of Locke and Newton, Inspired Jonathan Edwards

    1493 Words  | 3 Pages

    Furthermore, Locke's passion for morality is also seen in his interpretation of the social contract. We see that Locke's ideas in freedom of life, liberty, and property have formed the basic morals of past and current governments. One of Edwards's morals that have been seen throughout American history is the infinite sovereignty of G...

    Read More

  • Theory Of Property In John Locke's Second Treatise Of Government

    1562 Words  | 4 Pages

    First, Locke believes that everyone has the opportunity to cultivate the land that they own, which ideally is a proportionate share of the surrounding environment, and nothing more (Locke, Sec. 36). Locke’s theory of property is not just relative to physical entities, it can be an intellectual entity as well. An individual may have certain experiences and knowledge, develop theories and come to their own conclusions. Publishing said works are seen as property in the eyes of Locke as well. Another strength would be the logic of Locke’s argument, if you input your labour, that commodity becomes your own. Truth of this can be seen in section 33 of Locke’s Second Treatise of Civil Government, when Locke suggests that labour increases the value of land exponentially because when people own land themselves, they are more likely to increase the productivity of that land. According to Locke, the true value of land does not stem from the land, rather the labour invested in it. Locke’s theory however, does not take into account the processes in which someone becomes an owner. One of the main stances Locke outlines in his theory of property is that he equates property to being a natural right. Locke deems the right to private property to be equally important as life and liberty, however they cannot be

    Read More

  • On the Virtues of Private Property in Locke and Rousseau

    2220 Words  | 5 Pages

    In order to examine either philosopher’s views on property and its origins, it is necessary to go back to the beginning of human development, as it were, and discuss their different conceptions of the state of nature. As opposed to Hobbes whose vision of the state of nature was a state of war, Locke’s state of nature is a time of peace and stability. “We must consider what State all Men are naturally in, and that is, a State of perfect Freedom…A State also of Equality, wherein all the Power and Jurisdiction is reciprocal, no one having more than another.” (Locke, Second Tre...

    Read More

  • Locke and Rousseau

    1787 Words  | 4 Pages

    At the core of their theories, both Locke and Rousseau seek to explain the origin of civil society, and from there to critique it, and similarly both theorists begin with conceptions of a state of nature: a human existence predating civil society in which the individual does not find institutions or laws to guide or control one’s behaviour. Although both theorists begin with a state of nature, they do not both begin with the same one. The Lockean state of nature is populated by individuals with fully developed capacities for reason. Further, these individuals possess perfect freedom and equality, which Locke intends as granted by God. They go about their business rationally, acquiring possessions and appropriating property, but they soon realize the vulnerability of their person and property without any codified means to ensure their security...

    Read More

  • Locke State Of Nature Analysis

    1424 Words  | 3 Pages

    In this state of nature, according to Locke, men were born free and equal: free to do what they wished without being required to seek permission from any other man, and equal in the sense of there being no natural political authority of one man over another. He quickly points out, however, that "although it is a state of liberty, it is not a state of license," because it is ruled over by the law of nature which everyone is obliged to obey. While Locke is not very specific about the content of the law of nature, he is clear on a few specifics. First, that "reason, which is that law, teaches all mankind who will but consult it" and second, that it teaches primarily that "being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life liberty or possessions." Hence, right from the beginning, Locke places the right to possessions on the same level as the right to life, health, and liberty.

    Read More

  • Self Interest in the Political Philosophies of Mill and Locke

    1499 Words  | 3 Pages

    In order to understand how Mill and Locke came to the conclusion of how much freedom a person should possess, we must understand what a political thinker perceives as freedom and liberty. In John Locke’s writings, The Second Treaties of Government, he states that “all men exist in a state of perfect freedom to order their actions and dispose of their possessions and person as they think fit, within the bounds of the law of nature, without asking leave or depend...

    Read More

  • Locke, Rousseau, and King

    929 Words  | 2 Pages

    John Locke is a seventeenth century philosopher who believed that government should be based around the people rather than the power of one person. Equality and property were two factors that Locke considered to be the key to a great society. Locke begins his writings with a discussion on individual property and how each man body is his own property. This leads Locke into the argument that man can obtain property only by using his own labor. an example Locke gives is the picking of an apple. The apple is the property of the man who used his labor to pick it. He goes on to say “A person may only acquire as many things in this way as he or she can reasonably use to their advantage”. With the discussion of property Locke leads into the discussion of trade and monetary value stating that it is natural of man to w...

    Read More

  • Moral Economy in Defoe’s Robinson Crusoe and Locke’s Second Treatise of Government

    3072 Words  | 7 Pages

    Locke theorizeds extensively on property, privatization, and the means an individual can use for increasing his property. Initially, in the state of nature, man did not own property in the form of resources or land. All fruits of the earth were for the use of all men,“and nobody has originally a private dominion, exclusive of the rest of mankind, in any of them, as they are thus in their natural state” (Locke 353). In this state, people could appropriate only what they could make use of. It was unfair for one person to take more than he could use because some of that natural commodity would go to waste unless another man might have made use of it for his own benefit (360). Locke felt that God gave the bounties of nature to the people of earth and they, by default, should treat these bounties rationally. This rationalistic theory discourages waste.

    Read More

  • Marx (The Communist Manifesto) and Rousseau

    2059 Words  | 5 Pages

    The political philosophy of Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Karl Marx examined the role that the state played and its relationship to its citizen’s participation and access to the political economy during different struggles and tumultuous times. Rousseau was a believer of the concept of social contract with limits established by the good will and community participation of citizens while government receives its powers given to it. Karl Marx believed that power was to be taken by the people through the elimination of the upper class bourgeois’ personal property and capital. While both philosophers created a different approach to establishing the governing principles of their beliefs they do share a similar concept of eliminating ownership of capital and distributions from the government. Studying the different approaches will let us show the similarities of principles that eliminate abuse of power and concentration of wealth by few, and allow access for all. To further evaluate these similarities, we must first understand the primary principles of each of the philosophers’ concepts.

    Read More

  • Comparing John Locke, John Stuart Mill, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau

    2030 Words  | 5 Pages

    In order to examine how each thinker views man and the freedom he should have in a political society, it is necessary to define freedom or liberty from each philosopher’s perspective. John Locke states his belief that all men exist in "a state of perfect freedom to order their actions and dispose of their possessions and person as they think fit, within the bounds of the law of nature, without asking leave or depending upon the will of any other man." (Ebenstein 373) Locke believes that man exists in a state of nature and thus exists in a state of uncontrollable liberty, which has only the law of nature, or reason, to restrict it. (Ebenstein 374) However, Locke does state that man does not have the license to destroy himself or any other creature in his possession unless a legitimate purpose requires it. Locke emphasizes the ability and opportunity to own and profit from property as necessary for being free.

    Read More

  • Rousseau and Marx: Property and Inequality

    1831 Words  | 4 Pages

    Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Karl Marx both had the similar notion that property was the root of inequality, even though they both lived in different eras. Rousseau, who lived during the 18th century, was a staunch proponent of the idea that property gave rise to inequality, due to its unequal distribution. Similarly, Marx, who lived during the 19th century, contended that property gave rise to inequality because it created a class conflict between that of the upper class bourgeoisie, and the working class proletariat. However, for Rousseau, there was an underlying force that gave rise to property and that was amour propre. In simplest terms, amour propre is the vanity and self-love that leads one to seek personal gain, even if it may be at the expense of others (Rousseau 63). Rousseau argued that amour propre and private property were the sources of inequality because they drove man away from his natural state where he was equal amongst others.

    Read More

  • Karl Marx And Private Property: The Right To Property

    1146 Words  | 3 Pages

    The right to property, also known as the right to protection of property, is a human right and is understood to institute an entitlement to private property. The right of property is one of the most debated human rights, both in terms of its existence and interpretation. However, according to Karl Marx private property is the inevitable result of alienated labor or the product of the worker who is estranged from himself. It is reputed that the working class labors to produce products that belong to someone else, and that the reimbursement the working class receives is always less than the value of the product they create. The past readings in class have shown the theories in which Marx imposes the disadvantages of private property, and the rent of land in which the proletarian suffers and the bourgeois gains. One of the results of private property that Marx argues that it is the cause of the existence of estranged men, monopolies and alienated labor. The abolition of private property can be a summation of Communism theory, however the nature of this opposition is a controversial subject.

    Read More

More about Locke's View On Property: Karl Marx And John Locke

Open Document