Write an essay that explicates and assesses Lockeâs
and Rousseauâs
respective views of property and inequality. How does each thinker
understand the source of the institution of property? How does each of them conceive of the relationship between property and inequality? Are their views
compatible or not? If not, which thinker provides the most adequate account of this relationship and why. This is what I wrote so far: During the 17th
century the idea of property and inequality was never considered a matter of confronting. It was seen as if finding a tiny needle in a big stack of hay,
while not impossible, would take an immense amount of effort and courage. The right of property was controlled solely by the Monarch, no one dared to
question and expression of inequality was nonexistent. The Divine Right of Kings established and asserted its political legitimacy. The belief was that the
monarch acquired its power to rule directly from God thus imposing authority on property, equality and domination. By the late 17th century modern
philosopher Thomas Hobbes challenged the Divine Right of Kings to rule and rejected the concept of politics as natural. This form of modern political
thought paved the way for such philosophers as John Locke and Jacque Rousseau. Both modern philosophers vividly expanded on the concept of private
property and the relationship of inequality through their interpretation of the State of Nature. What was the State of Nature in their view and what did it
have to do with the source of the institution of property? Locke believed that all people have the rights to 3 essential elements life, liberty, and property.
People are good and equal not in their ability but in their rights. He argued that all men are born with the unlimited possession of property, with the
ownership of their fruits of labour and as long as there is an infinite amount of goods that can be used without wasting, then people have a natural right to
those goods and property. Yet Lockeâs
views The concept of private property for Locke was a natural God given right and significantly influenced the
ideas of government. He believed that the preservation of property was the fundamental reason that humans left the state of nature and formed
governments. According to Locke all men are born with the ownership of their own body and ownership of the fruits of their labor. He suggested that
because all men own their bodies any product of their physical labor also becomes their own property. For example, when an individual picks an apple,
the apple becomes theirs for they picked it, added their labor and made it their property. The individual invests labor into some good or material, he gains
ownership of that possession. The use of labor is completely individualistic and one should not be able to control another labor for it would violate their
natural rights. For Locke “Nothing was made by God for man to spoil or destroy.â
Individuals can only acquire so much before it begins to spoil. He
reiterated how man cannot take possession of more than he can use because he would then be wasting materials that might be used by other humans.
Locke writes in Second Treatise of Government âAs
much as any one can make use of to any advantage of life before it spoils; so much he may by his
labour fix a Property in. Whatever is beyond this, is more than his share, and belongs to others.â
(II, 31) .If man should act contrary to the common
good of humanity, he must then âforfeitâ
his right to property. John Locke’s idea leans on the notion that we are governed by a law of nature that
aims to promote the welfare of all humanity. Private property serves this aim by making human beings more productive, thereby creating more resources
for everyone. This may be interpreted as a practical theory yet once money was introduced it revolutionized the whole concept of property and allowed
humans to accumulate great amounts of wealth and large volumes of inequalities. The invention of money became a form of exchange that allowed
individuals to multiple their possessions. Since the value of currency did not spoil, there was no longer limitation on how much land one could own. Money
motivated the means of production and barter. According to Locke, the development of commerce was useful to mankind and once trade was established
money allowed people to desire a common value of worth to trade goods in a system of trade. Yet Locke believed that people should not accumulate
more property than they can use, for it would be a waste of resources and would defeat the purpose of ownership of land as well the productivity. He
referred to the production of labor as the ultimate source of value in property. Through the fruits of hard work one is rewarded hence, contributing to the
good of society. Locke makes the case that government exists to secure property rights and to protect men from arbitrary power. He states that while in
the state of nature men have a ânatural
right of unlimited property, in which society and government are not entitled to interfere.â
However The
assignment needs to be seven pages. Is it possible to incorporate this some how or either modified.
