Locke’s Property Problem

According to Locke, all people are free and equal. Consequently, the natural world belongs to all people in common. But each person, along with his labor, belongs only to himself. Thus, although all people share a common right to use the world, each person acquires a private right to resources he “mixes” with his labor. Before large-scale economic development, there was no problem with each person appropriating as much as he could use, because this left “enough, and as good” for others. But once money spurred development, people could efficiently use far more. Under these new conditions, there was no longer enough and as good lying in common. Consequently, although everyone got richer through economic development, the world divided into resource owners and employees working on others’ resources. All of this posed a dilemma for Locke. On the one hand, people could be required to leave the world lying in common, preserving equal standing but sacrificing well-being for all. On the other, people could be permitted to develop the world into a network of private plots, greatly increasing well-being for all but sacrificing equal standing. Locke notices the tension, but he lacks an adequate solution. He implausibly appeals to our purported consent to money and its consequences before ending the chapter, thus leaving his property problem for others to solve.

Private Right

This chapter provides a Kantian account of private right in relation to marriage and trade in sexual services. I argue that in addition to various non-ideal reasons and reasons based on equality that make same-sex couples want to have a right to marry, there are ideal reasons why they want such a right. I also extend this argument to defend the right to marry for non-binary, symmetrical polyamorous partners. Regarding trade in sexual services, I maintain that Kant’s account of bodily rights can explain why one never gets an enforceable right to have sex with another person even if one has a right to get some of the money back if a contract is broken. Importantly, these arguments hold regardless of what someone may think from the point of view of virtue or religion.

Kant on Structural Domination and Global Justice

This paper offers a novel reading of Immanuel Kant’s mature political philosophy. It argues that Kant’s doctrine of right is best understood as dealing with the question of how to justify practices of social power. It thereby suggests that the main object of Kant’s doctrine of right should be read in terms of individuals’ higher order power of free choice and action (“Willkür”). It then argues that the main normative problem Kant discusses in the doctrine of right is the problem of domination. While Kant must allow persons the exercises of their capacities for free choice and action for reasons of freedom, the structural upshots of such exercises by a multitude of empirically interconnected persons leads to a structure of private right, which is normatively problematic. This paper suggests interpreting this problem as one of structural domination. This reading sheds new light on Kant’s institutional theory of global justice. It enables us to better understand Kant’s theory of global institutionalization, particularly with regard to the question of why national and global institutionalization are so important in Kant’s theory and with regard to the question of what type of law cosmopolitan law is.

The effective method of judicial defence of private right and interest as category of judicial right

The article is sanctified to research and analysis of short story of civil judicial legislation “effective method of judicial defence” of private right and interest as a legal category of judicial right. Drawn conclusion, that the “effective method of defence” of private right or interest it follows to examine as the combined legal category, where triangle: effective-defence-right, it is his constituents that form an only judicial mechanism. Thus “efficiency” in a civilly-judicial legal mechanism is not independent, but depends on many factors. “Efficiency” is examined as a legal criterion that it does not follow to examine separately, but as category “effective method of defence” of private right or interest. Investigated separately and in their intercommunication legal categories: “effective method of judicial defence”; “determination of cramps of effective method of defence”; “method of defence, that does not conflict with a law”; on the basis of analysis of practice of ECHR and national courts of cassation instances intermediate determinations of the above-mentioned concepts are given. A “effective method of judicial defence” is the requirement (materially-legal measure of a force character) produced in a court about defence of private right or interest that answers maintenance of the broken right and the real renewal provides him, and if it be impossible such renewal must avouch for the face of receipt of corresponding compensation. “Determination of cramps of effective method of defence” is a judicial action of court that comes true during the stage of acceptance of cramps of decision and consists in the estimation of the requirement expounded in a lawsuit for the purpose her “efficiency” at the decision of question of belonging (adequacies) of select a plaintiff method of defence of private right and interest. “Method of defence, that does not conflict with a law”, - it produced in a court with the aim of effective defence broken, unrecognized or contested private right or interest requirement about defence of private right or interest, that does not conflict with a law (not forbidden by a law), answers maintenance of the broken right and provides him it is real renewal. Keywords: effective defence of the unrecognized or contested right broken; effective method of judicial defence; determination of cramps of effective method of defence; method of defence, that does not conflict with a law; access is to the justice; effective means of legal defence.

Kondisi Aktual Penguasaan Tanah Ulayat Di Maluku: Telaah Terhadap Gagasan Pendaftaran Tanahnya

What land registration concept is suitable for Tanah Ulayat (Petuanan Land)? This question is relevant to be answered when the actual conditions of tenurial of the Petuanan Land have undergone an individualization process. The above question is answered by applying the concept of land registration to the actual conditions of customary land tenure. For Petuanan Land which is still intact containing public authority and private right, the proper concept of land registration is only limited to the Land Register. Furthermor, Petuanan Land that has undergone the process of individualization into Tanah Marga or Soa and individual land, the concept of land registration can be carried out up to the issuance of certificates as proof of land rights. Thus, the portion of Petuanan Land that can be the object of Complete Systematic Land Registration in Maluku Province is Petuanan Land that has undergone a process of individualization, can be land that is possessed or owned by traditional village (although very rare), clan or soa. Intisari: Pendaftaran Tanah yang bagaimanakah yang tepat bagi Tanah Ulayat (Tanah Petuanan) di Maluku? Pertanyaan ini dipandang relevan untuk dijawab ketika kondisi aktual penguasaan Tanah Ulayat (Tanah Petuanan) itu sudah mengalami proses individualisasi. Pertanyaan di atas dijawab dengan cara menerapkan konsep pendaftaran tanah terhadap kondisi aktual penguasaan tanah ulayat. Bagi Tanah Petuanan yang masih utuh berisi kewenangan publik dan privat, konsep pendaftaran tanah yang tepat hanyalah sebatas Daftar Tanah. Selanjutnya, Tanah Petuanan yang sudah mengalami proses individualisasi menjadi Tanah Marga atau Soa dan Tanah Individual, maka konsep pendaftaran tanah dapat dilakukan sampai pada penerbitan sertipikat sebagai bukti hak atas tanah. Dengan demikian, bagian dari Tanah Petuanan yang dapat menjadi objek Pendaftaran Tanah Sistematik Lengkap di Provinsi Maluku adalah Tanah Petuanan yang sudah mengalami proses individualisasi, dapat berupa tanah yang dikuasai oleh negeri (meskipun sangat jarang), tanah yang dikuasai marga atau soa, dan tanah yang dikuasai oleh perorangan.

AMERICAN TELEVANGELICAL FRAMES: RELIGIOSITY, SPIRITUALITY, AND COMMODIFICATION

A secular state, like United States of America, guarantees the private right of individual to express their religious ideas in public. In the era of media, religious broadcasting serves as a mean for individuals to express their private rights of speech and act based on their faith in public. By taking prosperity televangelical broadcasts as the main object, this article examines several aspects that are critical for understanding the religiousness and the secularization of American televangelism. This article provides an overview of the socio circumstances and movement roots of evangelism, examines the religiosity and spirituality frames in televangelism, and identifies the commodification of the religiosity and spirituality frames.

Political Independence, Territorial Integrity and Private Law Analogies

Kant deploys analogies from private law in describing relations between states. I explore the relation between these analogies and the broader Kantian idea of the distinctively public nature of a rightful condition, in order to explain why states, understood as public things, stand in horizontal, private legal relations without themselves being private. I use this analysis to explore the international law analogues of the three titles of private right, explaining how territory differs from property, treaty from contract and the specific form of status relations between nations. I conclude with a brief discussion of the ongoing relevance of these horizontal relations.