John Stuart Mill And Liberalism Essay Example for Free

John Stuart Mill And Liberalism Essay John Stuart Mill (May 20, 1806, Pentonville, England – May 8, 1873, Avignon, France) was one of the greatest and most influential liberal thinkers of the XIX century and also a famous political economist and a Liberal Member of Parliament from 1865 to 1868 (Plank). As a prominent thinker, Mill introduced a new doctrine of liberty and can be considered as a first-rate liberal and a second-rate utilitarian (Reeves). John Stuart Mill (Source: httpwww. liberalinternational. orgeditorial. aspia_id=685) Conceived for the first time as a short essay in 1854, Mill’s famous and enormously influential book On Liberty that he published in 1859 is considered one of the founding philosophical works of classical liberalism and also one of the most fundamental texts on the concept of liberty. In the book which concerns social and civil liberty, the philosopher explores the nature of the power that society can legitimately exercise over individuals, and advocates their moral and economic freedom from the state (John Stuart Mill; John Stuart Mill: Political Philosopher). The most important point and basis for liberty made by Mill in his book is that â€Å"Over himself, over his own body and mind, the individual is sovereign†. Individuals exercise their sovereignty both through their judgment and actions. The main ideas that Mill explains in his On Liberty could be grouped into the following sections. 1. Mill opens his treatise by pointing out that the government is a â€Å"dangerous weapon† if it is not appropriately controlled and if its authority is not limited by the liberty of the citizens. In this way, Mill suggests, citizens will be ruled by a government whose rule is guaranteed against oppression and tyranny. However, at a given stage society develops into democracy â€Å"Page # 2† which does not fear tyranny any longer but where the majority can easily criminalize or marginalize a minority group of society and encroach on their rights or liberty. Mill calls it the â€Å"tyranny of the majority† and believes it is much worse than the tyranny of government because it is easier for individuals to be protected from a tyrant than â€Å"against the tyranny of the prevailing opinion and feeling†. He saw a danger of the old repression of despotic rulers being replaced by â€Å"despotism of custom†. Rules of conduct, thus, would be based on the majority opinion and there would be no protection in law against its tyranny (John Stuart Mill). He emphasizes that social tyranny is the greater danger than political tyranny for modern nations such as Britain (Heydt). As in Mill’s view the prevailing opinions within society are not necessarily the correct opinions on the one hand, and an individual has the right to choose whatever preference for his moral beliefs on the other hand, Mill concludes that this situation is wrong and unjust. In this case, individuals will be harmed, then their sovereignty over themselves will be impaired (John Stuart Mill). 2. Mill argues for a need of rational principle that would govern individuals within society, and thus introduces and explains his so-called harm principle which is supposed to regulate the limits of intervention in an individual’s actions. Individuals can act as they wish as long as their actions do not harm other individuals. Society should not intervene if the action affects only the individuals that undertake it even though these individuals are harming themselves. In Mill’s view, in a civilized community society has the right to legitimately exercise power over any individual against his will only in order to prevent harm to others. However, Mill distinguishes two categories of â€Å"harms†. If an individual fails to pay taxes, rescue another drowning individual, or appear in court to give evidence, then these acts (which he calls acts of omission) should be qualified as harmful and may be regulated. But if individuals give their consent to take risks without fraud or force, for example, by accepting unsafe employment offered by others, this is not considered as harming them (acts of commission). â€Å"Page # 3† In this case, society is not allowed to intervene except when individuals sell themselves into slavery (John Stuart Mill). 3. Children can’t take care of themselves and may instead harm themselves unintentionally. That is why, Mill explains, they do not have sovereignty over themselves, the harm principle can’t be applicable in this case and society is allowed to interfere with them against their will. Barbarians fall into this category, too. Mill states that barbarians can’t be sovereign over themselves and that despotism over them may be justified in cases when the end result is the improvement of their life. But as soon as they become more civilized and have the capability to decide for themselves, they must be given liberty from the government and its tyranny. Good examples of this, Mill illustrates, are Charlemagne and Akbar the Great who compassionately controlled and â€Å"helped† barbarian nations better manage their lives (John Stuart Mill). 4. According to Mill, human liberty includes several components without which individuals can’t be truly free: †¢ Individuals are free to think as they wish, and to feel as they do (the freedom to opinion and of speech). Mills argues that the freedom of speech is necessary for social progress because allowing people to freely express their opinions and ideas, even if they are false, is useful for two reasons. First, in an open exchange of ideas individuals are likely to understand that some of their beliefs may be erroneous and will thus abandon them. Second, in the process of debate individuals reaffirm their beliefs and prevent them from turning into mere dogma. Mill believes that it is important for individuals to understand why their beliefs are true (John Stuart Mill). †¢ Individuals are free to pursue tastes however â€Å"immoral† they may be considered by others so long as they are not harmful to others (John Stuart Mill). â€Å"Page # 4† †¢ Individuals are free to meet with other individuals (the freedom of assembly) (John Stuart Mill). 5. Mill believes that religion should be criticized in the same way as are other systems of thought regardless of the offence that such criticism may cause. One of main purposes which governed Mill’s philosophical endeavours all his life was his commitment to replace Christianity with a Religion of Humanity (Carey). 6. Mill’s liberal ideas made him an advocate of the development of efficient local government and associations and he fiercely opposed central control. He argued for the parents’ obligation to educate their children but disapproved of a central education system run by the state (John Stuart Mill). In what concerns individual freedoms, it is quite important to understand that Mill gives the specific justifications for them because he believes they will promote the progress of civilization and will be good for society. Mill does not regard liberty as a standard of value and does not mention any natural rights of individuals in his discussions. Instead he is mainly concerned with the utility of rights and freedoms of individuals for the social progress (John Stuart Mill; John Stuart Mill: Political Philosopher). Many critics point out that Mill underestimated the important role of social order and custom as a source of security or freedom. His liberalism is also weakened in the eyes of other critics who do not share his extremely optimistic view of human nature. They are particularly pessimistic about his rosy belief that it is humans’ conditioned engagement in a continuous attempt to achieve personal development that results in the existence of diverse personalities and viewpoints (Reeves). Mill is also often criticised for justifying the right of one developed nation to exercise despotism over other underdeveloped nations (or â€Å"barbarians† as he calls them) on the grounds that it brings them the benefits and advantages of higher civilization (John Stuart Mill and Liberal â€Å"Page # 5† Imperialism). Despite criticism, the remarkable greatness of Mill lies in his readiness and willingness to combine both his thoughts and actions. He was a progressive philosopher who was ready to go to jail for his beliefs. It is not surprising then that six years after he published his great book On Liberty, he decided to stand for parliament in order to better implement his beliefs. His most known initiatives include the introduction of an amendment to the Reform bill in a successful attempt to give women equal voting rights; his relentless pursuit of Governor Edward Eyre for having brutally suppressing an uprising in Jamaica; his fierce opposition to the suspension of habeas corpus in Ireland; his successful campaign against an attempt to prohibit demonstrations or meetings in public parks, and many others (Reeves). By and large, Mill’s career as a liberal politician could be regarded as a relative failure. His performance was usually acclaimed, but he often found himself in opposition to the aims and wishes of his electors. He was quite reluctant to compromise with his own principles just to get support of his electorate, and this resulted in his failure to be re-elected in 1868 (John Stuart Mill: Political Philosopher). 200 years after his birth, Mill’s liberalism is still relevant(Source: http://www. prospect-magazine. co. uk/article_details. php? id=7439) Mills was aware that On Liberty as well as many others of his philosophical works raised several important problems, such as the tyranny of â€Å"uniformity in opinion and practice† which would be more faced future generations than were by his own and that some critics believed that these problems were exaggerated because they were looking more at contemporary facts than at existing tendencies (Reeves). It may be argued that the issues that Mill was interested in and consistently dealt with in his time are without a doubt still relevant and important today (Plank). BIBLIOGRAPHY: 1. Carey, G. W. The Authoritarian Secularism of John Stuart Mill. Retrieved March 14, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://www. nhinet. org/carey15-1. pdf 2. Heydt, C. John Stuart Mill: Overview. Retrieved March 14, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://www. iep. utm. edu/m/milljs. htm 3. John Stuart Mill. Retrieved March 14, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://en. wikipedia. org/wiki/John_Stuart_Mill 4. John Stuart Mill and Liberal Imperialism. Retrieved March 14, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://www. antiwar. com/stromberg/s051802. html 5. John Stuart Mill: Political Philosopher. Retrieved March 14, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://www. john-mill. com/ 6. Plank, B. John Stuart Mill. Retrieved March 14, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://www. liberal-international. org/editorial. asp? ia_id=685 7. Reeves, R. John Stuart Mill. Retrieved March 14, 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://www. prospect-magazine. co. uk/article_details. php? id=7439