An Analysis of the Notions of Abundance and Slavery in Order to Rethink the Universal Range of Locke's Theory of Appropriation

Joan Severo Chumbita

Home > Vol 2, No 2 (2013): 69-83 > Chumbita

An Analysis of the Notions of Abundance and Slavery in Order to Rethink the Universal Range of Locke's Theory of Appropriation

Joan Severo Chumbita

Abstract

Lockean theory of property in terms of irrestricted appropriation is as widely known as the criticism that has been addressed to it. The notions of abundance and slavery will be discussed here to claim that it is more accurate to talk about universal privatization (unilateral and unequal) than to talk about irrestricted appropriation. "Universal" has here three different meanings, which will be considered in different sections. The first meaning of "universality" within the theory of appropriation is related to its territorial scope. In this regard, the notion of abundance as defined in Chapter V of Locke's Two Treatises of Government identifies the global perspective of the Lockean theory of appropriation. The second and third meanings arise from an analysis of the notion of slavery, and more precisely from both uses of the term. The study of political slavery, considered as illegitimate, will allow us to explore the paradoxical relation between Lockean theory of property (as universal) and particular states. Lastly, the notion of legitimate slavery (the appropriation of human beings) will allow us to establish the universality of the theory of appropriation and its object, not just concerning earth and fruits but human life too.

Keywords

Locke, theory of property, abundance, slavery, America

Full Text:

PDF (Español)

References

Armitage, D. (2004), “John Locke, Carolina, and the Two Treatises of Government”, Political Theory, 32; pp. 602-627.

Arneil, B. (1992). “John Locke, Natural law and colonialism”, History of Political Thought. Vol. XIII. N. 4. Winter.

Becker, R. (1992). “The ideological commitment of Locke: Freemen and servants in the Two Treatises of government”, History of Political Thought, Vol. XIII, N. 4, Winter.

Biagini, H. E. (1978). “El ius resistendi de Locke”. Madrid: Centro de Estudios Constitucionales.

Chumbita, J. (2011B), El estado de naturaleza lockeano como origen de la apropiación privada de la vida en su conjunto, tesis de licenciatura, Bs. As., Facultad de Filosofía y Letras, UBA.

Chumbita, J. (2011A) “El desplazamiento en la teoría de la propiedad de John Locke: del criterio de necesidad a la teoría del valor para justificar la colonización inglesa en América”, Mendoza, Cuyo. Anuario de filosofía Argentina y Americana, dic., vol. 28, nro. 2, 25-52.

Chumbita, J. (2013) “La caridad como administración de la pobreza”, Identidades, Revista del Instituto de Estudios Sociales y Políticos de la Patagonia, N° 4, junio (en prensa).

Cranston, M. (1968). John Locke, a biography. London: Longsmans.

Dunn, J. (2002). “What History Can Show: Jeremy Waldron´s Reading of Locke´s Christian Politics”, The Review of Politics. University of Notre Dame, 433-450.

Dunn, J. (1969). The political thought of Jonn Locke. An historical account of the argument of the “Two Treatises of government”. Cambridge: Cambridge University Presss.

Farr, J., (1986), “'So vile and Miserable an Estate': The Problem of Slavery in Locke´s Political Thought”, Political Theory, Madison: University of Wisconsin, Vol. 14, Nro 2, May.

Farr, J. (2008), “Locke, Natural Law and New World Slavery”, Political Theory, 36: May 6, pp. 495-522.

Glausser, W. (1990), “Three Approaches to Locke and the Slave Trade”, Journal of the History of Ideas, Vol. 51, No. 2, Apr. - Jun., pp. 199-221.

Grotius, H. (2005), The Rights of War and Peace (ed.Richard Tuck), Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, vol. 1, 2 y 3.

Filmer, R. (1966). Patriarcha en La polémica Filmer-Locke sobre la obediencia política. Madrid: Instituto de estudios políticos.

Locke, J. (1824). Works of John Locke in nine volumes. Londres: Rivington.

Locke, J. (1990). Segundo tratado sobre el gobierno civil. Un ensayo acerca del verdadero origen, alcance y fin del Gobierno Civil. (tr. C. Mellizo). Madrid: Alianza.

Locke, J. (2011). “Ensayo sobre la ley de pobres (1697)” en Ensayo sobre la tolerancia y otros escritos sobre ética y obediencia civil (tr. Blanca Rodríguez López y Diego A. Fernández Peychaux). Madrid: Minerva, 191-213.

Macpherson, C. B. (1970). La teoría política del individualismo posesivo. De Hobbes a Locke. (tr. J.-R. Capella). Barcelona: Fontanella.

Olivecrona, K. (1974). “Locke´s Theory of Appropiation”, The Philosophical Quarterly. Vol. 24., Nro. 96, Julio, 220-234.

Sigmund, E. (2002). “Jeremy Waldron and the Religious Turn in Locke Scholarship”. The Review of Politics, University of Notre Dame, 407-418.

Tuck, R. (2009), The Rights of War and Peace. Political Thought and the International Orden from Grotius to Kant, Oxford University Press: Oxford.

Waldron, J. (1979). “Enough and as Good Left for Others”, Philosophical Quarterly, 29, 319-328.

Waldron, J. (1984) “Locke, Tully and the Regulation of Property”, Political Studies, XXXII, 98-106.

Waldron, J. (2002B). “Response to Critics”. The Review of Politics. University of Notre Dame, 495-513.

Waldron, J. (2002A). God, Locke and Equality: Christian Foundations in Locke´s Political Thougth. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Wood, N. (1983). John Locke and Agrarian Capitalism, Berkeley: University of California Press.

Refbacks

There are currently no refbacks.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Las Torres de Lucca. Revista Internacional de Filosofía Política
ISSN-e

Username
Password
Remember me