使之变成他的财产
makes it his property."
为什么？因为毫无疑问地，劳动力是
Why? Because the labor is the unquestionable property
劳动者的财产，因此除劳动者以外
of the laborer and therefore, no one but the laborer
没人有权拥有融合了他的劳动力的劳动产物
can have a right to what is joined to or mixed with his labor.
然后他补充了一个重点
And then he adds this important provision,
至少，那里还留着足够的、同样好的资源给其他人
"at least where there is enough, and as good left in common for others."
我们不仅仅拥有土地上长出来的果实、
But we not only acquire our property in the fruits of the earth,
猎到的鹿、捕到的鱼来，
in the deer that we hunt, in the fish that we catch
我们还耕土，圈地，种下马铃薯
but also if we till and plow and enclose the land and grow potatoes,
这样，我们拥有的就不仅是马铃薯，还拥有土地
we own not only the potatoes but the land, the earth.
一个人能耕耘、种植、改良和培育多少土地
"As much land as a man tills, plants, improves, cultivates
以及土地上的产出，他就拥有多少财产权
and can use the product of, so much is his property.
他通过自己的劳动，把它从共有财产中圈出来
He by his labor encloses it from the commons.
因此，权利是不可分割的，这一观点
So the idea that rights are unalienable seems to distance
把洛克从自由主义中区分开来
Locke from the libertarian.
自由主义认为，我们对自己
Libertarian wants to say we have an absolute property right
有绝对产权，因此我们可以做自己
in ourselves and therefore, we can do with ourselves
想做的任何事
whatever we want.
洛克对这个观点并不是很认可
Locke is not a sturdy ally for that view.
事实上，他说，如果你认真地考虑自然权利
In fact, he says if you take natural rights seriously,
你就会发现，我们的自然权利
you'll be led to the idea that there are certain constraints
我们能做什么也是有限制的
on what we can do with our natural rights,
这些是限制上帝赐给的，或经过逻辑地反思
constraints given either by God or by reason reflecting
自由的真正含义
on what it means really to be free, and really to be free
自由的真正含义，就是承认我们的权利是不可分割的
means recognizing that our rights are unalienable.
所以， 这就是洛克和自由主义者的区别
So here is the difference between Locke and the libertarians.
但当我们谈到私有财产时
But when it comes to Locke's account of private property,
洛克似乎又重新成为了自由主义者的坚定盟友
he begins to look again like a pretty good ally
因为他对私有财产的看法始于
because his argument for private property begins
我们是自己的所有者这一观点
with the idea that we are the proprietors of our own person
因此，我们的劳动力
and therefore, of our labor, and therefore,
我们的劳动成果，
of the fruits of our labor, including not only
不仅包括，我们在自然状态下所收获的东西
the things we gather and hunt in the state of nature
而且包括那块我们培育、耕耘的土地
but also we acquire our property right in the land that we enclose
的所有权
and cultivate and improve.
有很多例子可以，让我们直觉地认为
There are some examples that can bring out the moral intuition
经过我们的劳动，就可以占有那些无主的东西
that our labor can take something that is unowned and make it ours,
尽管有时，会引起一些争议
though sometimes, there are disputes about this.
发达国家和发展中国家之间有个争议
There is a debate among rich countries and developing countries
与贸易有关的知识产权的争论
about trade-related intellectual property rights.
最近，对药物专利法的争论上升到了顶点
It came to a head recently over drug patent laws.
西方国家，尤其是美国，说
Western countries, and especially the United States say,
我们有庞大的制药业
"We have a big pharmaceutical industry
来开发新药
that develops new drugs.
我们希望世界上所有的国家都同意
We want all countries in the world to agree
尊重知识产权
to respect the patents."
在南非，出现了的艾滋病危机
Then, there came along the AIDS crisis in South Africa,
而美国的艾滋病药物十分昂贵
and the American AIDS drugs were hugely expensive,
远远超过大多数非洲人可支付的能力
far more than could be afforded by most Africans.
因此，南非政府说
So the South African government said,
我们将以更少的费用来购买
"We are going to begin to buy a generic version of the AIDS
抗艾滋病的非专利药
antiretroviral drug at a tiny fraction of the cost
因为我们可以找到一家印度制造公司
because we can find an Indian manufacturing company
他们破译了(美国药物)的配方
that figures out how the thing is made and produces it,
并以低价售出，因此如果我们可以
and for a tiny fraction of the cost, we can save lives
忽略专利因素的话，就能拯救更多的生命
if we don't respect that patent."
然后美国政府说
And then the American government said,
不行，这是一家美国公司投资
"No, here is a company that invested research
研发了这种药物
and created this drug.
你不能大规模生产这些药物而不支付
You can't just start mass producing these drugs without paying
相应的许可费
a licensing fee."
因此而引发了争议，这家制药公司
And so there was a dispute and the pharmaceutical company
起诉了南非政府，来阻止他们购买
sued the South African government to try to prevent their buying
那些廉价药，他们认为那些是盗版的
the cheap generic, as they saw it, pirated version of an AIDS drug.
但最终，这家制药公司作出让步，说
And eventually, the pharmaceutical industry gave in and said,
“好吧，你们可以这样做”
"All right, you can do that."
但是这类关于产权法规、知识产权、药物专利
But this dispute about what the rules of property should be,
在某种程度上
of intellectual property of drug patenting, in a way,
已经
is the last frontier of the state of nature because among nations
因为，国际间没有统一的专利权和财产权的法律
where there is no uniform law of patent rights and property rights,
在达成达到共识，或国际协议之前
it's up for grabs until, by some act of consent,
谁都可以争赢
some international agreement, people enter into some settled rules.
大家怎么看待，洛克对于私有财产的观点
What about Locke's account of private property
以及它如何在政府和法律出现之前就存在？
and how it can arise before government and before law
这是否正确？
comes on the scene? Is it successful?
多少人认为他的观点很有说服力？
How many think it's pretty persuasive?
请举手
Raise your hand.
有多少人并不觉得有说服力？
How many don't find it persuasive?
好吧，让我们听一听批评者的意见
All right, let's hear from some critics.
洛克关于私有产权的出现无需他人同意的观点
What is wrong with Locke's account of how private property can arise
有什么错？
without consent? Yes?
是的，我认为它正义化了以前欧洲殖民美洲的行为
Yes, I think it justifies European cultural norms as far as
回看当时，如果没有印地安人在美洲土地上的耕种
when you look at how Native Americans may not have cultivated American land,
当这些欧洲人来到美国
but by their arrival in the Americas, that contributed
（当然，他们为开发美洲做了巨大的贡献）
to the development of America, which wouldn't have otherwise
就不一定有现在的发展，或者不一定由这批（欧洲）人来开发
necessarily happened then or by that specific group.
所以，你认为这个理论是为（这些欧洲人）取得土地财产权而辩护
So you think that this is a defense, this defense of private property in land...
是的，因为它使原始取得的问题复杂化了
Yes, because it complicates original acquisition
如果你只承认，这批后来的外国人开发了这片土地
if you only cite the arrival of foreigners that cultivated the land.
- 我明白了，你叫什么名字？- Rochelle
I see. And what's your name? - Rochelle.
- Rochelle？- 是的
Rochelle? - Yes.
Rochelle说，这个财产获得的解释
Rochelle says this account of how property arises
迎合了当时欧洲人来北美
would fit what was going on in North America during the time
殖民的事件
of the European settlement.
Rochelle，你认为它是
Do you think, Rochelle, that it's a way of defending
为掠夺土地做辩解的一种方式？
the appropriation of the land?
是的，我的意思是，这个观点同样在为
Indeed, because I mean, he is also justifying
光荣革命做了辩护
（光荣革命：英国一场和宗教有关的非暴力宫廷政变，建立了立宪君主制度以及两党制度）
the glorious revolutions.
不难想象，他也在为殖民
I don't think it's inconceivable that he is also justifying
作辩护
colonization as well.
嗯，这是一个有趣的历史看法
Well, that's an interesting historical suggestion
我认为这还可以有很多讨论
and I think there is a lot to be said for it.
你如何看待他论据的有效性？
What do you think of the validity of his argument though?
因为你是正确的，这真的是在合理化
Because if you are right that this would justify the taking
夺走印第安人手中的土地
of land in North America from Native Americans
如果这是一个很好的论据，
who didn't enclose it, if it's a good argument,
那么洛克使得这一行为正义化了
then Locke's given us a justification for that.
如果这是一个不好的论据，那么洛克给我们带来的只不过是一个
If it's a bad argument, then Locke's given us a mere
在道义上站不住脚的辩护
rationalization that isn't morally defensible.
- 我倾向于后者- 你倾向于后者
I'm leaning to the second one- You're leaning toward the second one.
但这只是我自己的观点
But that's my opinion as well.
好，那么我们来听听是否有人
All right, well, then, let's hear if there is a defender
要为洛克对私有财产的观点辩护
of Locke's account of private property,
如果还能解决Rochelle的担忧那就更好了
and it would be interesting if they could address Rochelle's worry
Rochelle担忧，这只是为美国殖民者
that this is just a way of defending the appropriation
夺取印地安人土地行为
of land by the American colonists from the Native Americans
的一种辩护罢了
who didn't enclose it.
谁来为洛克的这一观点辩护？
Is there someone who will defend Locke on that point?
你要为洛克辩护么？
Are you going to defend Locke?
你指责了洛克正义化了欧洲人
Like, you're accusing him of justifying the European
屠杀印第安人的行为
basically massacre of the Native Americans.
但是，谁说洛克是在辩护呢？
But who says he is defending it?
也许，欧洲殖民是不对的
Maybe the European colonization isn't right.
也许，这是洛克在《政府论(下篇)》谈到的
You know, maybe it's the state of war that he talked about
战争状态
in his Second Treatise, you know. （指Second Treatise of Government一书）
而美洲原住民和殖民者、移民者之间的战争
So the wars between the Native Americans and the colonists,
可能就是洛克所说的战争状态，我们只能
the settlers, that might have been a state of war that we can only
通过签订协议或者达成共识来摆脱战争
emerge from by an agreement or an act of consent
而这需要公正来解决……
and that's what would have been required fairly to resolve...
是的，双方都得同意并落实
Yes, and both sides would have had to agree to it and carry it out and everything.
- 但在什么时候，你叫什么名字？- Dan
But what about when, what's your name? - Dan.
但是，Dan，你对Rochelle对27节
But Dan, what about Rochelle says this argument in Section 27
以及32节关于挪用土地的意见怎么看
and then in 32 about appropriating land,
