Rousseau argued that the negative consequences of property may be mitigated in some contexts when property could serve as a critical support for human virtue and autonomy. He also believed that there is no intrinsic good or evil in itself, but only relative to its uses; thus, he concluded that freedom must be valued even if it means suffering at times. In addition to these arguments, he also believed that property is necessary for social cooperation because without it, one would be forced to give up essential needs like food and shelter which are shared by all members of a society. Thus, Rousseau argued that freedom might be sacrificed for utility's sake, but that freedom should not be used as a justification for continuing this behavior. He concluded that the legitimate rights of property must be protected even if this leads to opposition from others who may suffer as a result. Furthermore, he believed that political power must be separated from economic power because they are not the same thing and they cannot be used interchangeably. Economic power can be used to influence people through bribery and other forms of coercion while political power can only be obtained through an election. Thus, Rousseau argued that no individual or group should have the ability to manipulate the government into granting its own wishes at the expense of others.