Preview

Tyranny Of The Majority, By John Stuart Mill

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
743 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Tyranny Of The Majority, By John Stuart Mill
According to Mill, freedom means to be protected against the tyranny of political governors. Rulers need to be recognized by people because the rulers interest are equal to the interest of the nation There are two methods to obtain liberty; the first one is by owning political rights and the second one is to have common agreed constitutional examination. He argues that there are some limitations that are required in order to achieve individual freedom. This freedom is in charge of establishing the limit to the power of rulers. However, this limitation of power cannot be applied in democracies, as he calls it “Tyranny of the majority” , because the will of people is the will of the most numerous. Moreover, one supposes that his own preferences …show more content…
The great majority of people don’t feel government opinions as theirs, but when they do it, their individual freedom is occupied by the government. Mill says that there is a strong rejection against any attempt of the government to control people. He states that the one of the most important objectives of individual freedom is self-protection. The power that can be exercised over individuals is to prevent hurting others, which is known as the harm principle. Punishments must be imposed to those who harm other people, so one’s aim must be to prevent evil actions. Individual freedom focuses on doing whatever we want as long as it doesn’t harm anyone. Besides, freedom is also part of political morality, which concerns toleration in religious …show more content…
He states that economic freedom is the most important freedom, that is to say, if you give up your economic freedom, you give up also the rest of your freedoms. However, without economic freedom, political freedom is useless, so it is essential to preserve it. The key issue is productive property, because this private property is what guarantees freedom. Under private ownership, there is no decision-making body to know what to do and make, so Hayek says that there must be a plan. Planning and competition need to be connected in order to maintain effective operation production, because there is a goal, which is known as the “general welfare” . According to Hayek, economic objectives cannot be separated from other life objectives. Economic freedom means the need for an opportunity and that we are able to solve our own economic issues. Moreover, money is one of the greatest instruments of freedom. This means that if people fight for money is because it offers us a wide range of benefits for us to enjoy, once we have obtained that money. Moreover, he argues that economy is connected, in other words, prices goes up and down and depend on many factors that need to be controlled. The competitive system is designed to reduce the power between people. It cannot be a fair system because under the free market you have to be impartial in order to ensure economic rights. In this system, everything can be obtained at

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Better Essays

    von Hayek’s defense of the free market is sound, but, fortunately for me, an attack on the logic rather than the ethics of the argument. While von Hayek identifies Galbraith’s fallacy and defends the attack on liberty and the market, he ignores the core moral argument and misses an opportunity to dispatch of The Dependence Effect on its own grounds.…

    • 1325 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Better Essays

    Hist 152 Final Paper

    • 1273 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Freedom from want – translated in world terms, means economic understandings which will secure to every nation a healthy peacetime life for its inhabitants – everywhere in the world.…

    • 1273 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Mill's argues for the Harm Principle based on liberty. He says that liberty must be protected and that is why we must follow the Harm Principle. He argues for the Harm Principle based on freedom of speech. Basically, what I got out of it, he says that no matter how badly the speech may seem immoral, it should be allowed regardless. It might help to add that we learned that Mills is a libertarian. Overall, Mills thinks that the government should not coerce people in to not doing…

    • 423 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Topic: "The only freedom which deserves the name, is that of pursuing our own good in our own way, so long as we do not attempt to deprive others of theirs, or impede their efforts to obtain it” (John Stuart Mill, On Liberty).…

    • 676 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Freedom from Summary

    • 328 Words
    • 2 Pages

    She states that another beneficial aspect of freedom is our “effective government” and speaker one argues that government is the reason he is safe and sound because if there was no superior power to make and enforce rules, everything would crumble. The best type of government is that which meddles the least amount possible in its people’s lives (Lappe, 510). According to the speaker, the people believe government needs to be minimized to an extent. Everyone assumes so much from the government, and then complain when they think there’s too much power over us argues speaker one. Government shouldn’t intervene with a person’s choices and if it does, it is taking our freedom away (“Freedom From and Freedom To”). Speaker one claims although this superior law is there to protect us, it cannot stop all forms of detriment. There has to be a boundary on how much government is allowed to take over, which means “less responsibilities” (“Lappe, 511) In order for the nation to be ultimately free, the people need to stop relying on government to take on so much responsibility claims speaker one.…

    • 328 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    In contrast to the argument of the anti-capitalistic view that the free-market fosters Impersonalism and Individualism, Ewert proves that it promotes relationships on both business and personal levels by facilitating human interaction. Henry Hazlitt explained the art that of economics involves examining the long-term effects that a policy has among all groups involved (Hazlitt, page 17). Policies that enforce limited federal regulations and taxes will result in the prosperity of all people who choose to put forth the time and effort to reach their goals. In closing, it is important to remember that true wealth and prosperity are gained by living for Christ (Private Property and Worship of…

    • 447 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    S. Mill, the only and liable reason for interfering into other people’s lives is if they do harm to others. This principle is very common and applied principle in many social and political settings. A supporter of many unacceptable issues in our society refers to this principle if they get into an argument of such nature. Drug legalization supporters often take shelter under this principle of J.S. Mill’s.…

    • 1284 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Final Exam Study guide

    • 2001 Words
    • 9 Pages

    -The idea advanced by John Mill that a society should only concern itself with actions that pose a direct harm to others.…

    • 2001 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    . .with the intention of better preserving himself, his liberty and property”. Individuals relinquish their absolute freedom and agree to follow laws because a government can protect one’s liberties far better than individuals. Thus, a free society is one in which its government ensures the basic rights of its citizens while maximizing their right to liberty. But what happens if a government neglects its purpose and passes laws that curtail both autonomy and natural rights?…

    • 794 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    When viewed through the lens of the harm principle, this positive link highlights how important it is to protect diversity to keep society vibrant and dynamic. According to Mill, the advancement of society depends on an individual's capacity to investigate, challenge, and even reject deeply rooted customs and traditions, as long as such actions do not harm others. At some point, real freedom requires striking a delicate balance between the moral obligations to respect others' rights to privacy and the capacity to express one's individuality. Sustaining this balance is essential for individual growth and for creating a flexible, resilient community that benefits from different perspectives. According to Mill, freedom is the ability for people to express themselves freely and the advantages that society as a whole comes from people following their interests, even when those interests do not coincide with established standards.…

    • 1548 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    In her 1964 book Virtue of Selfishness, Ayn Rand mentioned that her ideal form of capitalism is one which is “a full, pure, uncontrolled, unregulated laissez-faire capitalism—with a separation of state and economics.” Indeed, this Objectivism viewpoint has been used by many conservative policy makers, such as Malcolm Fraiser , the former Prime Minister of Australia, and esteemed economists such as Alan Greenspan and Martin Anderson to craft policies that reduces the intervention of the government, thereby allowing individuals more freedom to pursue their economic interests. There have been many debates about the rights and the wrongs of these policies, and this essay seeks to discuss if individuals should be free to pursue their economic…

    • 1408 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Better Essays

    Mill indicated that social pressure could stifle the views of others, as people pushed their plight to censor unwanted views; resulting in, an atrophied individual (as cited by van Mill, 2016). Mill conceptualised that it was important to be able to discuss, debate and share opinions without risk of penalty in order to progress the development of an individual (as cited by Jacobson, 2000, p. 295). Taking this argument into account and considering the diverse roles of those with social power; it still seems, the need for positive liberties are justified, not only for the security of society, but also for the protection of the speaker…

    • 1571 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Js Mills Conformity

    • 1808 Words
    • 8 Pages

    In “Principles of Political Economy & On Liberty,” J.S. Mills states that you have as much liberty as is consistent with other people therefore humans are inherently individuals. You are free to do what you please and to pursue your own idea of the good, so long as you do not harm another or prevent them from pursuing their good. Humans are naturally individuals, which is good because it is essential to the cultivation of the self. A basic problem that Mill sees with society is that individual spontaneity is not respected as having any good in itself, and is not seen as essential to well-being. Mills writes that in early stages of society, it is possible that there could be too much individuality.…

    • 1808 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    The readings assigned pertain to two opposing viewpoints of the role of government; economic rights, and individual rights. The main theme of both of these articles is focused on individual rights as presented in “The Economic Bill of Rights” (Franklin D. Roosevelt, 1944). However, they present differing interpretations on how these are applied in practice and their expected results. There are main points made by each author, and each has their respective “pros and cons”. Both readings have aspects that can support your fulfillment of “The American Dream” and relate to other materials presented in this course, such as, the quote by Thom Hartman and Food, Inc. the film.…

    • 1058 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Liberty and Paternalism

    • 1665 Words
    • 7 Pages

    After reading both articles, "Paternalism" by Dworkin and "On Liberty" by Mill, I believe that Dworkin is correct in explaining that some intervention is necessary under certain circumstances. I have come to this conclusion based on the fact that there do exist circumstances in which an individual is incapable of making a rational decision considering not only the well being of himself, but also the well being of other members of society. Also, the argument that the protection of the individual committing the action in question is not reason enough to interfere with the action is ludicrous in that one of our governments main reasons for existence is to protect the members of our society. This protection includes protection from ourselves at times when we are unable to rationally decide what is in our best interests. This essay will consist of an examination of this controversy as well as an application of my proposed conclusion.…

    • 1665 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Better Essays