64 Levin Mills on Liberty

JOHN STUART MILL’S ON LIBERTY 14 Journal of Liberal History 64 Autumn 2009 JOHN STUART MILL’S ON LIBERTY 150 YEARS LATER Michael Levin analyses the most well-known work of the greatest of the Victorian Liberal philosophers, published 150 years ago this year, and assesses its relevance to 2009. ohn Stuart Mill grew his Principles of Political Economy are lost in the crowd’. In conse- up in a highly intellec- (1848) was perhaps even more quence, mediocrity was becom- tual, liberal and cam- influential, and went into seven ing ‘the ascendant power among paigning environment. editions during Mill’s lifetime. mankind’. His father was the his- He had also gone public with This has sometimes been Jtorian, philosopher and econo- highly controversial views in seen as an opposition to rising mist James Mill – a populariser favour of the Irish poor during working-class influence, and of the utilitarian theories of the great famine of 1845–46 and Mill certainly believed that the his friend Jeremy Bentham. In in his essay ‘Vindication of the uneducated were not qualified 1823, at the age of seventeen, French Revolution of February to vote. Here, however, he was Mill followed his father into the 1848’. quite explicit as to the people to services of the British East India whom he was referring: ‘Those Company. In 1858, the year he whose opinions go by the finished writing On Liberty, his Mass society name of public opinion are not life was utterly transformed. In Mill decided to write On Lib- always the same sort of public: September he retired from the erty in 1854, although its intel- in America they are the whole East India Company in protest lectual roots can already be white population; in England, at its being taken under direct seen in essays written in the chiefly the middle class. But they state control following the 1830s. In 1835 and 1840 he had are always a mass, that is to say, Indian Mutiny. Mill believed reviewed the two volumes of collective mediocrity’1 – and a that this would make Indian Alexis de Tocqueville’s Democ- mass that imposes its norms and policy subservient to British racy in America and thereby did prejudices on everybody. Mill party-political considerations. much to make that work known called this ‘the tyranny of the Then in November his wife, and appreciated in Britain. Mill majority’.2 Harriet Taylor Mill, died of a himself was much influenced by Liberty’s old enemies were fever. On Liberty was sent to the de Tocqueville’s analysis of mass found at the apex of soci- publisher the same month. Mill society. This was a condition in ety: kings, governments and thought that it was as much hers which the old social gradations churches. The new enemy, the as his, and it is dedicated to her. were breaking down. Individu- mass, was in the middle rather As for Mill’s intellectual reputa- als were now no longer members than at the top of the social pyra- tion, by 1859 he was already an of a particular class or group, mid. This could lead to liberty’s established figure. His A System instead being members of soci- defenders being caught off their of Logic (1843) has been rated the ety in general. An atomised soci- guard by the new direction from most widely used logic textbook John Stuart Mill ety of individuals was emerging, which the current danger came. of the nineteenth century, while (1806–73) in which, said Mill, ‘individuals Mill thought the threat mattered Journal of Liberal History 64 Autumn 2009 15 johN STuaRT MIll’S on liberty 150 YEARS laTER for three reasons. Firstly, lib- In On Liberty Mill’s theory of progress had ape-like one of imitation’.6 This erty leads to the discovery of diversity of character and cul- is a poignant sentence which truth. Progress in thinking Mill warned ture as its cause. These were indicates the psychological back- can only be made when diver- that ‘he the factors that had gradually ground to the book, for Mill has sity of opinion is tolerated. elevated European societies been described as a manufac- Secondly, liberty is a require- who lets the above all others. In On Liberty tured man. His father did, in ment of our natural being. He he argued that all improvements fact, ‘choose his plan of life for described human nature as like world, or his to the institutions and mind of him’, and brought him up to be ‘a tree, which requires to grow Europe could be traced back a disciple, and so a propagator, and develop itself on all sides, own portion to three periods of free intel- of Bentham’s utilitarian creed. according to the tendency of of it, choose lectual ferment. One was the This brought about a mental the inward forces which make period immediately follow- crisis from which Mill gradually it a living thing’.3 Just as the his plan of ing the Reformation. Another emerged through his acquaint- body, by its very nature, needs was the Enlightenment, which ance with Coleridge and exercise, so, thought Mill, did life for him, Mill described as ‘limited to other Romantic writers who the mind. Individuals simply the Continent’. The third was reached the parts that austere could not develop themselves in has no need the ‘intellectual fermentation of Benthamism was barely willing a climate of mental constraint, of any other Germany during the Goethian to acknowledge. That, how- and this had important social and Fichtean period’, that of ever, was not the end of the mat- consequences. faculty than German Romanticism. Though ter, for later two rather forceful Thirdly, then, liberty was two of these instances were characters, Thomas Carlyle and the basic prerequisite for soci- the ape- comparatively recent, Mill felt Auguste Comte, both presumed, etal advancement. Mill’s gen- that their influence was com- quite wrongly, that they had eration had witnessed immense like one of ing to an end. ‘Appearances have found in Mill a devoted follower developments. Industry was imitation’. for some time indicated that all who would do their intellectual transforming the country, three impulses are well nigh bidding. The need to assert indi- shifting traditional class pat- spent’.4 Europe’s progress, there- viduality against outside pres- terns as new commercial pow- fore, derived from its diversity – sures, then, was one that he felt ers emerged and populations which was now endangered. very keenly. aggregated in the rapidly grow- Mill held before his read- So, in order to defend indi- ing cities. There had, within ership the dreadful warning viduality, Mill searched for a not-too-distant historical example of China. It was not a principle by which social inter- memory, been the European primitive or barbarian society, ference could be limited. He revolutions of 1789, 1830 and but an ancient civilisation that declared that ‘the sole end for 1848. Britain was proud to have had, at one time, achieved con- which mankind are warranted, remained immune from the siderable progress. It had, how- individually or collectively, in full force of these outbreaks ever, ossified at the point when interfering with the liberty of but still felt insecure as a result freedom was curtailed. China action of any of their number, is of the dangers they had posed. had then become a backwater: self-protection’. Consequently, A common intellectual preoc- world development had passed the ‘only part of the conduct of cupation was the question of it by. This was a vital lesson for any one, for which he is amena- origins and destinations. How Britain and the western world ble to society, is that which con- had human and social advance- in general. It should not take its cerns others. In the part which ment occurred? What were dominant position for granted merely concerns himself, his their mainsprings? Where were but, rather, urgently needed to independence is, of right, abso- we heading? These concerns maintain and fortify the basis lute’.7 Implicit here is the belief were particularly marked in from which its current eleva- that it is possible to draw an 1859, which, apart from Mill’s tion derived. As it was, Europe operational distinction between On Liberty, saw the publication seemed to be squandering its two kinds of action: self-regard- of two other immensely signifi- inheritance, for it was ‘decidedly ing and other-regarding. Mill cant works containing theories advancing towards the Chinese decided that only in the latter of progress: Charles Darwin’s ideal of making all people alike’.5 case had society a right to inter- Origin of Species and Karl Marx’s fere with individual actions. brief but still influential ‘Pref- Contemporary and later crit- ace to a Critique of Political The defence of individuality ics have found it hard to draw Economy’, which outlined In On Liberty Mill warned that a clear dividing line between the path of social development ‘he who lets the world, or his these two kinds of action. What successively through Asiatic, own portion of it, choose his remains significant is less the ancient, feudal and capitalist plan of life for him, has no need intrinsic value of the distinction modes of production. of any other faculty than the Mill was trying to draw than the 16 Journal of Liberal History 64 Autumn 2009 johN STuaRT MIll’S on liberty 150 YEARS laTER very liberal attempt to establish freedom of speech was central vi. The opinion we wish to a limit to social and political to the defence of individuality. suppress may be basically interference.

Load more