Let me add that it is one thing to say that he who will not work shall
not eat, and a very different thing to say that he who works shall enjoy
what he has produced. The former statement merely signifies that he who
will not contribute his share toward sustaining and improving human
society is not entitled to any part in the advantages of the social
order, though the charity of his fellow-men may grant him, under certain
conditions and in the hope of changing his disposition, what he is not
entitled to as of right. But the question what the share of the laborer
ought to be is one that can not be settled in the rough-and-ready
manner above suggested, and the considerations involved are, in truth,
far too numerous and complex to be introduced at this stage. The whole
question will be reopened later on. For the present it must suffice to
state certain purely moral considerations on which the right of property
may be made to rest. The following are the ideas which I should seek to
develop: Property is justified by its uses. Its uses are to support the
existence and promote the mental and moral growth of man. The physical
life itself depends on property. Even in a communistic state the food
any one eats must be his property in the sense that every one else is
debarred from using it. The moral life of men depends on property. The
moral life is rooted in the institution of the family, and the family
could not exist without a separate domicile of its own and the means of
providing for its dependent members. The independence and the growth of
the intellect depend on property. In short, property is an indispensable
adjunct of _personality_. This I take to be its moral basis. What I here
indicate, however, is an ideal right which the existing state of society
by no means reflects. By what methods we may best approach this ideal,
whether by maintaining and improving the system of private property in
land or by state ownership, whether by capitalistic or socialistic
production, etc., are questions of means, not of ends, and raise
problems in social science with which here we have not to deal.
Question--If the present social arrangements are not morally
satisfactory, if e. g., certain persons possess property to which on
moral grounds they are not entitled, should not the commandment against
stealing be suspended so far as they are concerned? The present system
of rights, imperfect as it is, is the result of social evolution, and
denotes the high-water mark of the average ethical consciousness of the
world up to date. Respect for the existing system of rights, however,
imperfect as it is, is the prime condition of obtaining a better system.
4. _Respect the mental liberty of others._ Upon this rule of justice is
founded the right to freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and what
is called the freedom of conscience. Point out the limitations of these
various rights which follow from the fact of their universality.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account