3 ms·

I sure hope you're not suggesting that the recognition and protection of private property is somehow linked with the survival of the species, because that would

by scrod 17y ago

I sure hope you're not suggesting that the recognition and protection of private property is somehow linked with the survival of the species, because that would demonstrate a pretty shallow view of history. Indeed, the notion of "private property" often comes hand in hand with authoritarian force: http://everything2.com/title/The+Enclosure+Movement http://everything2.com/title/The+Enclosure+Movement

fexl 17y ago
You have linked to a story of people who used authoritarian force to violate private property. The people who took that land from its rightful owners were thieves. Rightful property is established by production or trade. A rough recursive definition goes: Your body and mind are your property. If you make a thing using your property, that thing is your property. If you obtain a thing by trading your property for it, that thing is your property. (I view "gift" as a special case of trade, where the price is zero.) I would also define "trade" as a voluntary contractual interaction between two parties. The word "voluntary" precludes force, and the word "contractual" precludes fraud.
- rudzki 17y ago
  It's a little bit more complicated. I mean, suppose it's true that the only things you own are your mind, body, and the things you make using them. Then, the only things you can legitimately own are your mind, body, and bodily waste. Oh, and spit. So, there must be something else that you can own. For Locke, you can own land and other natural resources by mixing your labor with it. (But what this really means is a matter of serious debate, involving very old people wearing argyle socks, pipe tobacco, and tenure)
  - fexl 17y ago
    I think the recursion gets off the ground better than that. Notice that I said "if you make a thing using your property, that thing is your property." Property starts with your mind and body but it doesn't end there. Certainly an infant produces spit, vomit, and poop. But it doesn't stop there. The infant also produces cuteness, affection, and love. In any case the parents give the infant food, shelter, education, and care for free. Those are gifts. So the infant grows into a strong, healthy, and wise adult. He obtains that position largely through gifts from his parents, but he has also done some production and trade along the way, for example any jobs he did as a teenager. Now he produces far more than spit, vomit, and poop. He uses his mind and body to produce all sorts of things other people value. He owns the products of his mind and body right up until the time he trades them for something else. Simple example: he buys a set of tools using the money he earned as a teenager cutting grass and starts a small repair business. He is now using both the physical and intellectual capital he has accumulated over the years to produce even more goods and services. That capital is his property. So my definition gets off the ground far better than you suggest. Spit and poop ... you so funny!

by scrod 17y ago

fexl 17y ago

You have linked to a story of people who used authoritarian force to violate private property. The people who took that land from its rightful owners were thieves. Rightful property is established by production or trade. A rough recursive definition goes: Your body and mind are your property. If you make a thing using your property, that thing is your property. If you obtain a thing by trading your property for it, that thing is your property. (I view "gift" as a special case of trade, where the price is zero.) I would also define "trade" as a voluntary contractual interaction between two parties. The word "voluntary" precludes force, and the word "contractual" precludes fraud.

rudzki 17y ago
It's a little bit more complicated. I mean, suppose it's true that the only things you own are your mind, body, and the things you make using them. Then, the only things you can legitimately own are your mind, body, and bodily waste. Oh, and spit. So, there must be something else that you can own. For Locke, you can own land and other natural resources by mixing your labor with it. (But what this really means is a matter of serious debate, involving very old people wearing argyle socks, pipe tobacco, and tenure)
- fexl 17y ago
  I think the recursion gets off the ground better than that. Notice that I said "if you make a thing using your property, that thing is your property." Property starts with your mind and body but it doesn't end there. Certainly an infant produces spit, vomit, and poop. But it doesn't stop there. The infant also produces cuteness, affection, and love. In any case the parents give the infant food, shelter, education, and care for free. Those are gifts. So the infant grows into a strong, healthy, and wise adult. He obtains that position largely through gifts from his parents, but he has also done some production and trade along the way, for example any jobs he did as a teenager. Now he produces far more than spit, vomit, and poop. He uses his mind and body to produce all sorts of things other people value. He owns the products of his mind and body right up until the time he trades them for something else. Simple example: he buys a set of tools using the money he earned as a teenager cutting grass and starts a small repair business. He is now using both the physical and intellectual capital he has accumulated over the years to produce even more goods and services. That capital is his property. So my definition gets off the ground far better than you suggest. Spit and poop ... you so funny!