John Locke's Natural Right To Property

This paper details the principles and reasoning of John Locke’s natural right to property. The paper will detail in the following order: what men commonly share in the world, the fundamental principle of ownership, one’s ownership of oneself and labor, how that labor can be used to acquire external goods, the importance of labor in seizing property for the individual, and how to preserve property that one already owns. After stating Locke’s argument about property I will critically analyze his argument with my own thoughts and opinions. Locke’s thesis is that all humans own their body and the physical labor in which their bodies are used for. When a man applies his labor to a possession that possession becomes his, if not already owned by …show more content…
In Locke’s most famous publication Second Treatise of Government it is interpreted that there are three main limits put on private property. The first of the three, known as the spoilage restriction, states a person can only accumulate as much as they can use before it spoils (Second Treatise of Government, 12). This rule is set forth to keep people from taking too much of one resource which could be used for the benefit of other people. Simply put, use as much as one can enjoy. The second restriction, known as the sufficiency restriction, is that one must leave “enough or good enough” for others. This restriction tie’s back into the first one where the premise is sharing and leaving what oneself can’t use is necessary for all to have enough. However, this restriction does not apply in instances where money is involved because money is a medium which doesn’t depreciate. The third is that one can only acquire property through their personal …show more content…
Locke says the community must have standing rules which are the same for all persons. The community reservers the right to execute the rules and punishments against peoples who break their laws, for they have submitted their rights to the community. This avoids the chaos that ensues when someone tries to punish another in a state of nature; the punishment could be unjust and the victim of the punishment could take vengeance. I am mixed in my personal opinions regarding Locke, some of his ideas such as everyone having a right to life, liberty and property I agree with. However there are other specific aspects I disagree with, such as his sufficiency restrictions in regards to money. The areas I agree the most with Locke on are his ideas of everyone having the right to life, liberty, and property. He has narrowed the basic necessities for all men to be happy and live peacefully. It’s interesting how Locke sees that men must give up these rights when committing themselves to a government, but it makes sense because that’s the only way a government could enforce the laws against