Abstract or Introduction
Nature bestowed right to freedom on human beings in the state of nature, according to the naturalist. The right to freedom possessed by individuals in the state of nature allowed them access to the land. Therefore, possession of property emanates from the ability of individuals to work the land, according to John Locke. As a result, individuals had unequal possession and right to property in the state of nature. The departure from the state of nature to the political state means that human beings moved with their rights of ownership to property. However, the land that was free for all to work upon in order to acquire right of ownership is being controlled by the state in order to prevent unequal distribution of resources and promote redistribution of common good amongst the people. And also, to effectively manage the scarce resources in the civil state that form the basis of property ownership in the political state. Therefore, individuals in the political state are duty bound to the state authority in terms of obligation and respect for the state laws. On the other hand, the state is expected to protect and guarantee the rights of the people. In the case of breach of the trust reposed in the state, the essence of departing the state of nature has been defeated and consequently, the state has lost its legitimacy. Therefore, right to property commands obligation to the state. This essay aims at discussing Locke's political thought on 'property and obligation' as demonstrated in Schochet's work on 'guards and fences.'
- Quote paper
- Mr. Sesan Adeolu Odunuga (Author), 2019, Discussion about Locke's Political Thought on "Property and Obligation" in Schochet's Work on "Guards and Fences", Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/458020