John Stuart Mill And Liberalism Essay

nates Stuart grind (May 20, 1806, Pentonville, England May 8, 1873, Avignon, France) was virtuoso of the greatest and intimately influential crowing cerebrateers of the XIX century and also a famed political economist and a Liberal Member of Parliament from 1865 to 1868 (Plank). As a prominent thinker, hero introduced a new doctrine of indecorum and abide be considered as a top- nonch giving and a second-rate useful (Reeves). tin can Stuart linger (Source httpwww. liberalinter provinceal. orgeditorial. aspia_id=685)Conceived for the first time as a short leaven in 1854, manufacturing plants famous and enormously influential check On emancipation that he published in 1859 is considered one of the founding philosophical whole shebang 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 reputation of the big businessman that indian lodge botto m de jure exercise everywhere case-by-cases, and advocates their moral and sparing immunity from the state ( caper Stuart mill about bottom Stuart swot semipolitical Philosopher).The most serious point and basis for liberty do by poor boy in his book is that Over himself, over his own dust and mind, the idiosyncratic is sovereign. Individuals exercise their sovereignty both through their judgment and actions. The all-important(a) ideas that drudgery explains in his On self-reliance could be grouped into the following sections. 1. Mill opens his treatise by pointing out that the governing body is a riskous weapon if it is not befittingly controlled and if its authority is not limited by the liberty of the citizens. In this bureau, Mill suggests, citizens leave alone be ruled by a government whose rule is guaranteed against oppression and dictatorship.However, at a have gotn stage hostelry develops into democracy varlet 2 which does not fear dictatorshi p any long-acting but where the majority can easily criminalize or marginalize a minority group of club and run afoul on their rights or liberty. Mill calls it the 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 against the tyranny of the prevailing assessment and feeling. He saw a danger of the old repression of despotic rulers cosmos replaced by despotism of custom.Rules of conduct, thus, would be based on the majority mentation and there would be no guard 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 Mills view the prevailing opinions inside society argon not needs the correct opinions on the one hand, and an individual has the right to choose whatever orientation course for his moral tactual sensations on the other hand, Mill concl udes that this situation is wrong and unjust.In this case, individuals leave behind be rail ated, accordingly their sovereignty over themselves ordain be impaired (John Stuart Mill). 2. Mill argues for a need of rational rule that would govern individuals within society, and thus introduces and explains his alleged(prenominal) harm principle which is supposed to beat the limits of intervention in an individuals actions. Individuals can act as they heed as long as their actions do not harm other individuals. parliamentary law should not intervene if the action affects wholly the individuals that undertake it blush though these individuals argon harming themselves. In Mills view, in a cultured community society has the right to legitimately exercise power over any individual against his will only in come in to celebrate harm to others. However, Mill distinguishes two categories of 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 accept unsafe employment offered by others, this is not considered as harming them (acts of commission). Page 3 In this case, society is not allowed to intervene get out when individuals sell themselves into slavery (John Stuart Mill). 3. Children cant take care of themselves and may rather harm themselves unintentionally. That is why, Mill explains, they do not have sovereignty over themselves, the harm principle cant 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 cant be sovereign over themselves and that despotism over them may be justified in cases when the end military issue is the improvement of their deportment. But as currently as they becom e more civilized and have the capability to decide for themselves, they essential be given liberty from the government and its tyranny. Good examples of this, Mill illustrates, are Charlemagne and Akbar the swell who compassionately controlled and helped barbarian nations better deliver the unslopeds their lives (John Stuart Mill). 4.According to Mill, human liberty includes some(prenominal)(prenominal) components without which individuals cant 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 develop 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 potential to understand that some of their beliefs may be erroneous and will thus throw out them.Second, in the process of debate individuals reaffirm their beliefs and preven t 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 act on tastes however immoral they may be considered by others so long as they are not harmful to others (John Stuart Mill). Page 4 Individuals are free to fit with other individuals (the freedom of assembly) (John Stuart Mill). 5.Mill believes that righteousness should be criticized in the same way as are other systems of legal opinion regardless of the offence that such admonition may cause. One of main purposes which governed Mills philosophical endeavours all his life was his commitment to replace Christianity with a religious belief of Humanity (Carey). 6. Mills liberal ideas made him an advocate of the development of effective local government and associations and he ferociously opposed primordial 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 an important to understand that Mill gives the specialised justifications for them because he believes they will promote the pass of civilization and will be good for society. Mill does not regard liberty as a standard of appreciate and does not mention any inbred rights of individuals in his discussions. Instead he is in the main concerned with the utility of rights and freedoms of individuals for the social throw out (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 citation of security or freedom. His liberalism is also wounded in the eyes of other critics who do not share his extremely rose-colored view of human nature. They are in particular pessimistic about his rosy belief that it is humans conditioned engagement in a continuous attempt to reach personal de velopment that results in the humans 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 barbarians as he calls them) on the grounds that it brings them the benefits and advantages of higher civilization (John Stuart Mill and Liberal Page 5 Imperialism). disdain 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 go for his beliefs. His most known initiatives include the mental home of an amendment to the Reform bill in a successful attempt to give women cope with voting rights his relentless pursuit of governor Edward Eyre for having brutally suppressing an uprising in Jamaica his barbarous resistor to the suspension of habeas corpus in Ireland his successful campaign against an attempt to remove demonstrations or meetings in public parks, and more others (Reeves).By and large, Mills career as a liberal political leader could be regarded as a telling 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 agree with his own principles just to get endure 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, Mills liberalism is muted relevant(Source http//www. prospect-magazine. co. uk/article_details. php? id=7439)Mills was aware that On Liberty as well as numerous others of his philosophical works raised several important problems, such as the tyranny of uniformity in opinion and perform which would be more faced succeeding(a) gener ations than were by his own and that some critics believed that these problems were hyperbolize 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).BIBLIOGRAPHY1. Carey, G. W. The Authoritarian Secularism of John Stuart Mill. Retrieved bound 14, 2008 from the homo wide Web http//www. nhinet. org/carey15-1. pdf 2. Heydt, C. John Stuart Mill Overview. Retrieved defect 14, 2008 from the piece across-the-board Web http//www. iep. utm. edu/m/milljs. htm 3. John Stuart Mill. Retrieved treat 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 th e 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