Скачать или смотреть KOL037 | John Locke's Big Mistake: Stephan Kinsella at Liberty in the Pines

John Locke's Big Mistake - Stephan Kinsella at Liberty in the Pines.
Originally published on Apr 24, 2013. This one has a better audio track than the original.

Stephan Kinsella speaks on the topic of Locke's big mistake: How the labor theory of property ruined economics and political theory.

Podcast here: http://www.stephankinsella.com/paf-po...

I spoke last weekend at the “Liberty in the Pines” (facebook event) conference at Stephen F. Austin State University, in Nacogdoches, Texas. Sponsored by the Young Americans for Liberty chapter and the Charles Koch Foundation, this one-day event brought together liberty-lovers of all stripes from surrounding areas. My speech was “Locke’s Big Mistake: How the Labor Theory of Property Ruined Political Theory.” Stefan Molyneux and Jeff Tucker appeared and delivered speeches as well (with Jeff’s inspiring keynote resulting in a resounding standing ovation). Walter Block conducted an “Ask a Libertarian” Q&A session (remotely), and relative newcomer Jessica Hughes delivered a surprisingly radical and resounding speech on “The Constitution of Faux Authority.” [Update: See Liberty in the Pines Roundup.]

This podcast episode includes my speech and Q&A (about 54 minutes) plus the panel Q&A (about another 50 minutes). The panel Q&A touched on issues like peaceful parenting, spanking, and so on. Not to toot my own horn, but I know I have a lot of a/v material out there, so I do believe this speech of mine is one of the most important I’ve ever done.

Grok shownotes: In this lecture from the Libertarian Papers Audio Series, recorded circa 2010, titled “Locke’s Big Mistake: How the Labor Theory of Property Ruined Political Theory,” Stephan Kinsella critiques John Locke’s labor theory of property, arguing it introduced a metaphorical and imprecise framework that has distorted political and property rights theory (0:00-5:09). Kinsella, a libertarian patent attorney, contrasts Locke’s idea—that mixing labor with unowned resources creates property rights—with the libertarian homesteading principle, which emphasizes first use or appropriation without requiring labor (5:10-15:14). He contends that Locke’s labor metaphor fosters confusion, notably contributing to the flawed concept of intellectual property (IP), which wrongly treats non-scarce ideas as ownable, and connects this to broader errors like the labor theory of value that influenced Marxism (15:15-25:24). Kinsella’s analysis highlights how imprecise language, such as “owning labor,” has led to significant theoretical missteps.

Kinsella further explores the consequences of Locke’s labor theory, illustrating how it underpins misguided arguments for IP by equating mental labor with physical labor, thus justifying monopolies over ideas (25:25-35:34). He clarifies that property rights arise from scarcity and first use, not labor, using examples like homesteading land versus creating a poem, and critiques related metaphors like “selling labor” in contracts, which he reframes as conditional title transfers (35:35-45:44). In the final segment, Kinsella advocates for a first-use-based property theory to eliminate IP and align with libertarian principles, addressing objections like voluntary slavery and emphasizing clear language to avoid metaphorical traps (45:45-55:54). He concludes by rejecting attempts to tie Locke’s theory to IP, urging libertarians to abandon labor-based property notions for intellectual freedom and market efficiency (55:55-56:05). This lecture is a rigorous critique of a foundational philosophical error, relevant to liberty and property rights debates.
Grok detailed summary below.

Update: Several favorable comments: e.g. “It is a shame how few views this has. I use this video often to help libertarians understand the trap of “self ownership” and I am so glad, now years ago, you fixed this for me in our interview”, “Stephan, this talk is gold. Sharing.”, “This was really helpful. I appreciate and enjoy Kinsella’s focus on using language precisely.”

Update: See Stephen Decker’s report on the event.

Update: See also Hoppe on Property Rights in Physical Integrity vs Value, discussing International News Service v. Associated Press, 248 U.S. 215, 246 (1918), where the Supreme Court recognized a quasi-property right in the fruits of one’s labor, what is sometimes called the “sweat of the brow” doctrine (a doctrine later rejected in the copyright context in Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Tel. Serv. Co., 499 U.S. 340 (1991).