In a world where "property" was never changed to "happiness" in US discourse and documents, how would political science and philosophy have developed differently?
In a world where "property" was never changed to "happiness" in US discourse and documents, how would political science and philosophy have developed differently?
Might make banning slavery even harder then it was!
Perhaps, but the gist of the abolitionist movement countered the property rights argument with the moral argument that Humans Cannot Be Property. The 3/5 compromise in the Constitution already showed that blacks were not property in the same sense as a horse or a cow. So one may support the idea of strong private property rights that does not necessarily mean that one supports chattel slavery. Mid-19th Century libertarians like Lysander Spooner were often staunch abolitionists.
Benjamin
When Jefferson talked about Life Liberty and Property, He was talking Innate Property, Not Real or Personal.In the US, probably a greater focus on property rights that survive into the modern day
you know if it said fruits of their labor I could see socialist have a slightly easier time in the usa then using that as a justification of labor theory of value.Would it actually say "pursuit of property" or "right of property," or even something a bit wordier?
("Life, liberty, and the fruits of their labor" or something to that effect.)