7 ms·

>Under US law, the Congress has nearly unlimited power to regulate interstate commerce As intended: Jefferson chose the term "pursuit of happiness" rather than

>Under US law, the Congress has nearly unlimited power to regulate interstate commerce As intended: Jefferson chose the term "pursuit of happiness" rather than "estate" (unlike Locke's earlier formulation) in the declaration of independence because all of the founding fathers viewed commerce and property as a function or construct of society, rather than a natural right in itself.

gumby 6y ago
And because the word “happiness” at the time meant something more like felicity or properness, not pleasure or “near joy” as it does today.
- DetroitThrow 6y ago
  Yes! There is even further context to break down about what we originally formulated our natural rights to address; it's something I think all American's interested in their rights should read into.
IncRnd 6y ago
all of the founding fathers viewed commerce and property as a function or construct of society, rather than a natural right in itself Your interpretation goes against the Founder's stated beliefs. The true foundation of republican government is the equal right of every citizen, in his person and property, and in their management. ~ Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Kercheval, July 12, 1816 In a word, as a man is said to have a right to his property, he may be equally said to have a property in his rights. ... Government is instituted to protect property of every sort; as well that which lies in the various rights of individuals, as that which the term particularly expresses. This being the end of government, that alone is a just government, which impartially secures to every man, whatever is his own. ~ James Madison, Essay on Property Government is instituted no less for the protection of the property than of the persons of individuals. ~ James Madison, Federalist 54 the faculties of men, from which the rights of property originate ... is the first object of government ~ James Madison, Federalist 10 And, if we read Locke's own words: The necessity of pursuing happiness [is] the foundation of liberty. As therefore the highest perfection of intellectual nature lies in a careful and constant pursuit of true and solid happiness; so the care of ourselves, that we mistake not imaginary for real happiness, is the necessary foundation of our liberty. ~ https://www.pursuit-of-happiness.org/history-of-happiness/john-locke/
- DetroitThrow 6y ago
  This is not interpretation - it is not ambiguous why the Committee of Five purposefully chose to downplay the function of government to specifically protect property rights - again, in explicit contrast to Locke's formulation of natural rights bearing "Life, Liberty, and Estate" - here's some further reading of their thoughts (including Madison's) that contradict this decontextualized misinformation: "All Property, indeed, except the Savage's temporary Cabin, his Bow, his Matchcoat, and other little Acquisitions, absolutely necessary for his Subsistence, seems to me to be the Creature of public Convention." -Franklin http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch16s12.html http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch16s12.... "Private Property therefore is a Creature of Society, and is subject to the Calls of that Society, whenever its Necessities shall require it..." https://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch12s25.html https://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch12s25... "While it is a moot question whether the origin of any kind of property is derived from Nature at all … it is considered by those who have seriously considered the subject, that no one has, of natural right, a separate property in an acre of land … Stable ownership is the gift of social law, and is given late in the progress of society." -Jefferson https://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/print_documents/v1ch16s25.html https://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/print_documents/v1c... Even originally, Locke thought of the right to property more explicitly in terms of acquiring property more along the lines of the "pursuit of happiness" as evidenced by his Second Treatise, and Madison spoke in terms of that document as well: https://thf_media.s3.amazonaws.com/CPP/FP_PS02w.pdf https://thf_media.s3.amazonaws.com/CPP/FP_PS02w.pdf Your quote from Locke supports their explicit and his implicit viewpoint here, and your other quotes are out of context of their primary sources which end up supporting their broader view of "Property" == "Pursuit of happiness".
  - IncRnd 6y ago
    Your original statement was, ALL of the founding fathers viewed commerce and property as a function or construct of society, rather than a natural right in itself which is false. You are quoting out of context to support a particular view. For example the first you posted from Franklin continues: "All Property, indeed, except the Savage's temporary Cabin, his Bow, his Matchcoat, and other little Acquisitions, absolutely necessary for his Subsistence, seems to me to be the Creature of public Convention. Hence the Public has the Right of Regulating Descents, and all other Conveyances of Property, and even of limiting the Quantity and the Uses of it. All the Property that is necessary to a Man, for the Conservation of the Individual and the Propagation of the Species, is his natural Right, which none can justly deprive him of: But all Property superfluous to such purposes is the Property of the Publick, who, by their Laws, have created it, and who may therefore by other Laws dispose of it, whenever the Welfare of the Publick shall demand such Disposition." It is the "Property superfluous to such purposes" that belongs to society. Your interpretation was contrary tp that, believing it to mean ALL property belongs to society. That is refuted by the very links you posted. In Frankin's second quote, he stated his belief, rightly so, that he was hesitant to create an aristocracy based on property. He was arguing for a bicameral legislature and in the process admitted the rights of people to own property (the upper legislature composed of property owners). Also, in Franklin's second quote, you quoted out of context. Immediately, prior to what you quoted, he spoke about property rights. We know, that, when one of them has attempted to keep a few Swine, he has not been able to maintain a Property in them, his neighbours thinking they have a Right to kill and eat them whenever they want Provision, it being one of their Maxims that hunting is free for all; the accumulation therefore of Property in such a Society, and its Security to Individuals in every Society, must be an Effect of the Protection afforded to it by the joint Strength of the Society, in the Execution of its Laws.. His argument is that the purpose of a society is to protect property rights.

gumby 6y ago

And because the word “happiness” at the time meant something more like felicity or properness, not pleasure or “near joy” as it does today.

DetroitThrow 6y ago
Yes! There is even further context to break down about what we originally formulated our natural rights to address; it's something I think all American's interested in their rights should read into.

IncRnd 6y ago

all of the founding fathers viewed commerce and property as a function or construct of society, rather than a natural right in itself Your interpretation goes against the Founder's stated beliefs. The true foundation of republican government is the equal right of every citizen, in his person and property, and in their management. ~ Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Kercheval, July 12, 1816 In a word, as a man is said to have a right to his property, he may be equally said to have a property in his rights. ... Government is instituted to protect property of every sort; as well that which lies in the various rights of individuals, as that which the term particularly expresses. This being the end of government, that alone is a just government, which impartially secures to every man, whatever is his own. ~ James Madison, Essay on Property Government is instituted no less for the protection of the property than of the persons of individuals. ~ James Madison, Federalist 54 the faculties of men, from which the rights of property originate ... is the first object of government ~ James Madison, Federalist 10 And, if we read Locke's own words: The necessity of pursuing happiness [is] the foundation of liberty. As therefore the highest perfection of intellectual nature lies in a careful and constant pursuit of true and solid happiness; so the care of ourselves, that we mistake not imaginary for real happiness, is the necessary foundation of our liberty. ~ https://www.pursuit-of-happiness.org/history-of-happiness/john-locke/

DetroitThrow 6y ago
This is not interpretation - it is not ambiguous why the Committee of Five purposefully chose to downplay the function of government to specifically protect property rights - again, in explicit contrast to Locke's formulation of natural rights bearing "Life, Liberty, and Estate" - here's some further reading of their thoughts (including Madison's) that contradict this decontextualized misinformation: "All Property, indeed, except the Savage's temporary Cabin, his Bow, his Matchcoat, and other little Acquisitions, absolutely necessary for his Subsistence, seems to me to be the Creature of public Convention." -Franklin http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch16s12.html http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch16s12.... "Private Property therefore is a Creature of Society, and is subject to the Calls of that Society, whenever its Necessities shall require it..." https://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch12s25.html https://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch12s25... "While it is a moot question whether the origin of any kind of property is derived from Nature at all … it is considered by those who have seriously considered the subject, that no one has, of natural right, a separate property in an acre of land … Stable ownership is the gift of social law, and is given late in the progress of society." -Jefferson https://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/print_documents/v1ch16s25.html https://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/print_documents/v1c... Even originally, Locke thought of the right to property more explicitly in terms of acquiring property more along the lines of the "pursuit of happiness" as evidenced by his Second Treatise, and Madison spoke in terms of that document as well: https://thf_media.s3.amazonaws.com/CPP/FP_PS02w.pdf https://thf_media.s3.amazonaws.com/CPP/FP_PS02w.pdf Your quote from Locke supports their explicit and his implicit viewpoint here, and your other quotes are out of context of their primary sources which end up supporting their broader view of "Property" == "Pursuit of happiness".
- IncRnd 6y ago
  Your original statement was, ALL of the founding fathers viewed commerce and property as a function or construct of society, rather than a natural right in itself which is false. You are quoting out of context to support a particular view. For example the first you posted from Franklin continues: "All Property, indeed, except the Savage's temporary Cabin, his Bow, his Matchcoat, and other little Acquisitions, absolutely necessary for his Subsistence, seems to me to be the Creature of public Convention. Hence the Public has the Right of Regulating Descents, and all other Conveyances of Property, and even of limiting the Quantity and the Uses of it. All the Property that is necessary to a Man, for the Conservation of the Individual and the Propagation of the Species, is his natural Right, which none can justly deprive him of: But all Property superfluous to such purposes is the Property of the Publick, who, by their Laws, have created it, and who may therefore by other Laws dispose of it, whenever the Welfare of the Publick shall demand such Disposition." It is the "Property superfluous to such purposes" that belongs to society. Your interpretation was contrary tp that, believing it to mean ALL property belongs to society. That is refuted by the very links you posted. In Frankin's second quote, he stated his belief, rightly so, that he was hesitant to create an aristocracy based on property. He was arguing for a bicameral legislature and in the process admitted the rights of people to own property (the upper legislature composed of property owners). Also, in Franklin's second quote, you quoted out of context. Immediately, prior to what you quoted, he spoke about property rights. We know, that, when one of them has attempted to keep a few Swine, he has not been able to maintain a Property in them, his neighbours thinking they have a Right to kill and eat them whenever they want Provision, it being one of their Maxims that hunting is free for all; the accumulation therefore of Property in such a Society, and its Security to Individuals in every Society, must be an Effect of the Protection afforded to it by the joint Strength of the Society, in the Execution of its Laws.. His argument is that the purpose of a society is to protect property rights.