What is Nostr?
Leo Fernevak
npub1y02…fvpl
2023-10-16 21:29:39

Leo Fernevak on Nostr: A brief exploration on Locke's position on both slavery and property rights. -------- ...

A brief exploration on Locke's position on both slavery and property rights.

--------
"Slavery is so vile and miserable an estate of man, and so directly opposite to the generous temper and courage of our nation, that it is hardly to be conceived that an "Englishman" much less a "gentleman" should plead for it." (Two Treatises Of Government, part 1, chapter 1.1)
---------

I would say that this introduction to his book gives a clear oposition against slavery. While he is also simultaneously patting his fellow Englishmen on the back with assumed virtues, I would read this flattery as a form of sugar to allow the medicine of the message to sink down. He makes an allusion to gentlemen and sets a determined tone that anyone aspiring to be a civilized English gentleman, must not argue in favor of slavery.

---------
"The fruit or venison which nourishes the wild Indian, who knows no enclosure, and is still a tenant in common, must be his, and so his -- i.e., a part of him, that another can no longer have any right to it before it can do him any good for the support of his life." (Two Treatises Of Government, part 2, chapter 5.26, page 129)
----------

This seems to be a general acknowledgement of some form of 'first right of land use' to american natives in regards to their territories, including both that which grows and the animals of the land. Locke was living in Europe and he seems to have only given the subject a cursory glance. But if we follow his next principles, we can keep in mind that he attributed the same rights of property to all humans.

---------
"Every man has a "property" in his own "person". This nobody has any right to but himself. The "labour" of his body and the "work" of his hands, we may say, are properly his. (Chapter 5.27, page 130)
--------

Following the meaning of this statement, it becomes evident that slavery is an attack against property rights - an attack against the right of every human to own themselves and to own the fruits of their labor. Slavery understandably disallows a man the fruits of his labor.

---------
"As much land as a man tills, plants, improves, cultivates, and can use the product of, so much is his property."
---------

While this is an incomplete definition that leaves room for interpretation, it seems it would include native americans using land for cattle hunting, foraging and homesteading. If he fails to describe all manners of land use I wouldn't assume that his intention was to dispossess other people living on another continent from himself, but that it would more likely be an omission based on his cursory treatment of this narrow subject. He assumes that natives have the same property rights as everyone else, so it isn't something he dwells on.

‐-----------
"Men living together according to reason without a common superior on earth, with authority to judge between them, is properly the state of Nature.

But force, or a declared design of force upon the person of another, where there is no common superior on earth to appeal to for relief, is the state of war" (Section 2, chapter 3.19, page 126)
------------

So, what did Locke mean with a state of war?

--------
"And hence it is that he who attempts to get another man into his absolute power does thereby put himself into a state of war with him." (Section 2, chapter 3.17, page 125)
--------

Next, another similar passage:

--------
"So he who makes an attempt to enslave me thereby puts himself into a state of war with me." (Chapter 3.17)
-------

------
"It being reasonable and just I should have a right to destroy that which threatens me with destruction" (Chapter 3.16)
-----

This is clearly a general defense of anyone who is being abused, to have the right to stand up against the abuse and enter into a state of war against the aggressor.

To sum up, contrary to some claims that Locke was hostile to native americans, I think that Locke's principles would have supported the rights of american natives to fight back - to enter a state of war - if their liberty and natural rights to use their land was at stake.

Thank you for reading.
Author Public Key
npub1y02f89rpykzhqmrjjz99uwgyl9gh06sg0vpjmklu62rzxpx8mxps7zfvpl