• Keeponstalin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 days ago

    I Strongly disagree. The capitalist mode of production is axiomatic to Liberalism. Private ownership of the means of production is what is being referenced, not personal property. The alternative, a socialist mode of production, where companies are owned and governed in a democratic structure by all the workers, is completely viable. It’s a democratization of the workplace and economy.

    Locke saw individual liberty as defined through private property, contract, and market—in other words, by individual ownership of economic possessions that could not be arbitrarily usurped by the state. Freedom for Locke amounted to more than absence from external restraint; it also meant living in conformity with a nonarbitrary law (to his left critics, a protocapitalist law) to which the individual had consented.

    • J Lou@mastodon.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      7 days ago

      Liberalism refers to both a coherent political philosophy and a historical political tendency. The former liberalism is anti-capitalist. Yes many historical liberals were pro-capitalism, but this position makes their liberalism incoherent.

      Private property rests on the principle that workers have an inalienable right to appropriate the positive and negative fruits of their labor. Capitalism violates this norm. Locke was wrong

      A market economy of worker coops isn’t socialism

      @politicalmemes