John Locke Dapl Analysis
In this essay, I argue that John Locke would agree in the construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL). I would examine my arguments by presenting Locke’s arguments and views in the state of nature, state of war, the creation of money in the state of war, and property rights that DAPL representatives have. In the end of this essay, I am hoping to prove that Locke has convinced his reader that the construction of DAPL is an appropriate action to take.
According to Locke, “We must consider, what state all men are naturally in, and that is, a state of perfect freedom to order their actions and a state also of equality, wherein power and jurisdiction is reciprocal, no one having more than another”, (Locke, p. 8). Perfect freedom and equality …show more content…
If a land is kept for years without any use and someone discover that it has benefit to the American people, then this person should cultivate it and make use out of it. These people somehow have the God granted privilege to property and therefore has the sole rights to the construction. The state of nature would not exist without the cooperation of human kind, however once the cooperation is broken, then the state of war occurs. Anyone that infringes others towards their life, liberty, or possessions should be punish accordingly. Money places an emphasized to labor, even it is unfortunate, it fosters the drive for people to improve and cultivate. Property are entitled to men that put in labor and hard work into it. Opposing parties of the DAPL constructions are therefore left with nothing to argue with Locke as they are not cooperating in the state of nature, thus created the state of war for a governing body to look after their property. Their property is then cultivated by the DAPL representatives to reap benefits out of it through the creation of money. Subsequently, placing labor into the property and will soon provide oil domestically to the American people. Locke would also say that the opposing parties did not engage in any labor and they certainly do not have the rights to this piece of
According to Locke, “We must consider, what state all men are naturally in, and that is, a state of perfect freedom to order their actions and a state also of equality, wherein power and jurisdiction is reciprocal, no one having more than another”, (Locke, p. 8). Perfect freedom and equality …show more content…
If a land is kept for years without any use and someone discover that it has benefit to the American people, then this person should cultivate it and make use out of it. These people somehow have the God granted privilege to property and therefore has the sole rights to the construction. The state of nature would not exist without the cooperation of human kind, however once the cooperation is broken, then the state of war occurs. Anyone that infringes others towards their life, liberty, or possessions should be punish accordingly. Money places an emphasized to labor, even it is unfortunate, it fosters the drive for people to improve and cultivate. Property are entitled to men that put in labor and hard work into it. Opposing parties of the DAPL constructions are therefore left with nothing to argue with Locke as they are not cooperating in the state of nature, thus created the state of war for a governing body to look after their property. Their property is then cultivated by the DAPL representatives to reap benefits out of it through the creation of money. Subsequently, placing labor into the property and will soon provide oil domestically to the American people. Locke would also say that the opposing parties did not engage in any labor and they certainly do not have the rights to this piece of