How absolute is the right to property in Lockes political theory?
The purpose of this essay is to consider how absolute the property right that John Locke presents in the Two Treatises of Government is. I argue that Locke’s property right is almost absolute, though Macpherson is exaggerating when asserting that it has no limits. Drawing on Waldron’s arguments, I demonstrate that the supposed ‘enough and as good’ proviso is not a limitation at all. I maintain that the spoilage proviso amounts to little. Utilizing Sreenivasan’s arguments, I show that the subsistence limitation is considerably less important than Ashcraft asserts. I conclude that the limits on the Lockean property right amount to little, and that it is therefore almost absolute. The right to property Locke bases property rights in natural law. He writes: … natural reason … tells us, that Men, being once born, have a right to their Preservation, and consequently to Meat and Drink, and such other things, as Nature affords for their subsistence (II, 25; 1) The same conclusion is suppor
Related Questions
- Does railroad property owned by a railroad company or railroad property containing a right of way get treated in the same manner as roads?
- What limitations are placed on a debtor’s right to use, sell, or lease its property during a Chapter 11 case?
- How absolute is the right to property in Lockes political theory?
