So the simplest way I think about this is similar to Locke's. You own yourself - nobody else has the right to own you. If you disagree with that, we can chat ab

So the simplest way I think about this is similar to Locke's. You own yourself - nobody else has the right to own you. If you disagree with that, we can chat about it but I'm going to move forward with that as true. Ok, so everything else is owned by everyone equally. (It's actually important that these things are all owned in commons rather than unowned.) In a state of nature, you walk over, pick up an apple off the ground. By applying your work to pick up the apple, it is now more your apple than it is other people's. That's where property comes from. An application of personal labor. It gets more complicated from there, but that's the start of it. >You only have rights because society collectively secured those rights, and gave them to its members (and it took lots of fighting to secure them in the first place). Heck, if you were a black person, without Rosa Parks, you might still not have the right to many things. And it wasn't much better for the average white throughout history. And it wasn't even that it was thought of as injustice. More accurately, if you don't have the rights and only have those society gives you, it WASN'T an injustice. That's one of the reasons it is important that you have the rights innately. If you only have what society gives you, then it denying you things is totally within its rights and just. In a practical sense, you only can exercise those rights society protects (if you want to remain a part of society). That doesn't mean you don't have them, which is why it can be unjust to deny you their use. The conception of internal rights is one of the big reasons we don't have slavery or serfs anymore. You can laugh at it or say it's unrealistic, but it's surprisingly important that rights come innately rather than from external sources.