卢梭与洛克两位都是17世纪西方杰出的思想家，作者从人权和财产权来讨论卢梭与洛克理论的差异。洛克的思想是人权和私人拥有财产是统一的,卢梭强调另一方面,有关财产和构建自己的与洛克不同的理论体系 The Comparison of Rousseau and Locke’s Theory In the seventeenth-century, the first British bourgeois revolution broke out, which influenced Locke's whole life and his political and ideological position. At the same time, he also became a defense tool for parliamentary bourgeois state. In the book “The First Treatise of Civil Government”, Locke criticized the feudal monarchy, stating that God has no authority beyond the natural signs of other people to elect someone. That construction provided the bourgeois parliamentary foundation for “The Second Treatise of Civil Government”, which led us to explore this book about why we need a government, what kind of government we need, what kind of rights we need, and how we achieve our rights with such a government. As a famous representative of modern bourgeois liberalism, John Locke’s most their outstanding contribution was the link of possession of property and liberty. On the one hand, it laid the moral foundation of property rights using freedom; on the other hand, it gave freedom a positive and substantive content using property rights. Locke hypothesized, “what state all men are naturally in, and that is, a state of perfect freedom” (Second Treatise of Civil Government, p.9). The reason that this state was free was because people were able to determine their actions and dealt with their body and property by appropriate method they consider. It aimed to promote peace, protect human, and teach people that they are equal and independent. In this natural state, people were not just free, but also equal. No one needed to obey other’s will and authority. In such a state of nature, Locke thought that people had the right to be talented, and the society had the three basic values: the right to life, liberty and property, which Locke referred to as ownership. First, Locke expanded the personality rights into property rights through labor and laid the humanity foundation for property. He said: The earth, and all that is therein, is given to men for the support and comfort of their being. And tho' all the fruits it naturally produces, and beasts it feeds, belong to mankind in common, as they are produced by the spontaneous hand of nature; and no body has originally a private dominion, exclusive of the rest of mankind, in any of them, as they are thus in their natural state: yet being given for the use of men, there must of necessity be a means to appropriate them some way or other, before they can be of any use, or at all beneficial to any particular man. (Second Treatise of Civil Government, p.20) And based on the private ownership, Locke expounded a classic theory of property rights: Though the earth, and all inferior creatures, be common to all men, yet every man has a property in his own person: this no body has any right to but himself. The labour of his body，英语论文，英语论文题目，and the work of his hands, we may say, are properly his. Whatsoever then he removes out of the state that nature hath provided, and left it in, he hath mixed his labour with, and joined to it something that is his own, and thereby makes it his property. It being by him removed from the common state nature hath placed it in, it hath by this labour something annexed to it, that excludes the common right of other men: for this labour being the unquestionable property of the labourer, no man but he can have a right to what that is once joined to, at least where there is enough, and as good, left in common for others.(Second Treatise of Civil Government, p.20) In this way, private property rights acquired rationality as a product of human labor.Second, Locke achieved freedom by setting political power and protecting property rights. Locke thought that protecting people's property would equally protect human freedom. Also as the modern social contract theorist, Rousseau did not value and affirm property as Locke did, but revealed the negative affection of possession of private property on human equality and freedom from the opposite direction. Locke defended and affirmed property based on human freedom; but Rousseau connected the possession of property with the loss of private and freedom, and denied it. On the fundamental values of property rights, the former was a liberal, while the latter was a thorough democrat. Compared to Locke idea that the property rights are as human’s rights, Rousseau believed that private ownership was a historical product when human developed to a certain stage, which was not eternal. Rousseau believed that private ownership is a production of social development and a symbol of human society from barbarism into civilization. Rousseau did not think property is inviolable. Freedom and life belonged to the same individual and could not be transferred. He said: |
