<p>Kantians claim that the unilateral acquisition of property that Lockeans defend faces an authority problem in determining what counts as acquisition. However, Kantians face an analogous problem in stipulating how authority itself can be acquired. In this paper I argue that both theories are pushed into a position where they are forced to countenance the necessity and hence legitimacy of unilateral property-authority acquisition. Lockeans must do so where there are no settled property conventions, and Kantians must do so where there is not yet any omnilateral political authority, since omnilateral action presupposes an omnilateral actor, one must unilaterally take steps to create one where there isn’t one already. I argue that given the instrumental necessity of this process to a rightful condition, its earliest steps must be permissible.</p>