Sure I can clarify.
Let’s say I grow tomatoes. From a Lockean view I have mixed the land with my labor to produce a valuable good which would not have existed if had not contributed my labor. I own that labor, as a function of owning my body. There is a theological hair to split here for Muslims, where we might say that Allah owns my body, but I am clearly the vicegerent of my body and all else follows the same.

So, the reason, the incentive I have to transform soil into a valuable good is that I expect to benefit from it, either by feeding myself, feeding my family, feeding my neighbor in charity, or selling the goods in the market.

In my view, because I am the owner/vicegerent of my body and my labor I am accountable for my actions. If I engage in destructive behavior I am responsible for compensating the victim of my actions. If I engage in constructive behavior I am responsible for the goods that I produce. So the responsibility falls on me to allocate the tomatoes. How much to my family? How much to my neighbor? How much to the market? For Muslims Allah gives guidance in this decision, but the responsibility still falls on me to follow that guidance.

If you arrive at my farm and claim responsibility for allocating the tomatoes, even though we have no contract, and you have provided no labor, you are de facto claiming to be the owner/vicegerent of my actions. You are going back in time and saying, “No, you did not labor in soil so that you may benefit. You labored in the soil so that I may benefit.”

You are claiming that I labor for you against my will.

Keep up the good work ak. We all love u for it.

Faisal

I think the author of this article would also appreciate the book, as the chapter on Islam explores specifically the credit system that developed, which extended credit based not (solely) on profiteering, but on honor and reputation, to the mutual benefit between all parties. This too was taken by Europeans and corrupted (or perhaps simply mismanaged), leading to the development of financially-driven capitalist empires.

ASA,
This was a pretty good article. I didn’t know the Occupy Movements were functioning in that manner. But sis, to answer your query, there are some resources concering property in Islam. Check out Mohammad Hisham Kamali’s book, “The Right to Life, Security, Privacy and Ownership in Islam.”
http://www.islamicbookstore.com/b10003.html

Books can and have been written on this issue….but as a socialist who converted to Islam, I would say that there is common ground on social justice issues. Differences arise, however, when means and goals are discussed. For example – the socialist agitates for the establishment of a “classless society” where “everything belongs to everyone” and the government redistributes assets. By comparison, Islam recognizes that there will always exist rich and poor and instead levies a MORAL obligation on the wealthy to help those in need. And this gets to the crux of the issue – Islam is pro-Morality while Marxism is a moral void. IMO, #Occupy needs to exchange its “tax the rich” placards for “tax the BANKS”…

I wish you could’ve fleshed out your thoughts in these sentences more. I’m not sure I’m convinced you can compare the common ownership Marxists argue for to that of slavery; that’s quite an unsubstantiated leap.

I think, though, that the occupy protests are making a lot of Muslims – at least me – wonder what Islam’s stance is when it comes to not just property rights, but the capitalism vs socialism debate as a whole. I really hope that you, or another contributor to this site, can write a piece fleshing our your thoughts on these particular questions more. Thanks for a wonderful post!