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 torian,J 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. Mill’s argument here is perhaps wrong, but still ‘contain a Thus far it might appear that the most famous part of the portion of truth’.15 Since Mill solely defined liberty nega- book. His striking basic state- prevailing opinions seldom tively as consisting in the absence ment on this is as follows: contain the whole truth, of outside pressures, but he also they might well benefit added a positive side. This con- If all mankind minus one were from contact with further sisted in liberty as the free exer- of one opinion, and only one portions of it. cise of rationality. Rationality, person of the contrary opinion, Finally, one chapter later, Mill however, was not attainable by mankind would be no more made a partial but significant everyone, so some people were justified in silencing that one withdrawal. He now considered not yet fit for liberty. In hisAuto - person, than he, if he had the the possible social consequences biography Mill asserted that rep- power, would be justified in of free speech and decided that resentative democracy was not silencing mankind.11 law and order had to be given an absolute principle. Its applica- priority. Opinions, then, should tion was a matter of time, place Mill then provided a number of still be free, but their expres- and circumstances. Mill, then, justifications of varying plausi- sion should be limited if they are may be described as a develop- bility for his position: likely to have detrimental con- mental liberal in that people i. To silence the expression sequences in practice: only qualify for the liberal rights of an opinion is to rob the and freedoms when they attain a human race. An opinion that corn-dealers fairly high level of general devel- ii. The opinion may be right, are starvers of the poor, or that opment. In the first chapter of in which case suppression private property is robbery, On Liberty Mill explicitly left would deprive people of the ought to be unmolested when out of account ‘those backward chance to exchange error simply circulated through the states of society in which the for truth. press, but may justly incur pun- race itself may be considered as iii. The opinion may be ishment when delivered orally in its nonage’.8 Mill, presum- wrong but suppression is to an excited mob assembled ably, had in mind, among oth- still unjustified, for people before the house of a corn- ers, the Indians who had been would lose ‘the clearer per- dealer, or when handed about the subject of his employment. ception and livelier impres- among the same mob in the His father had written a famous sion of truth, produced by form of a placard.16 History of British India and it its collision with error’.12 So seems that neither father nor even false opinions have a son had what would now count positive function. The limits of state action as proper respect for the level of iv. ‘We can never be sure that This modification of his free civilisation, culture and philos- the opinion we are endeav- speech principles in the light ophy that the sub-continent had ouring to stifle is a false of their application is typical achieved. For them: ‘despotism opinion.’ It may actually be of Mill. More than just being a is a legitimate mode of govern- true. Of course, those who philosopher, he was always con- ment in dealing with barbar- attempt to suppress an opin- cerned with the implementa- ians, provided the end be their ion may think it false but tion of the views he advocated. improvement, and the means ‘they have no authority to His concern with the practical justified by actually effecting decide the question for all consequences of his analysis led that end’.9 mankind’. ‘All silencing of Mill to ponder the legitimate discussion is an assumption limits of state action. He gave a of infallibility.’13 This modifi- number of examples of wrong- Freedom of speech v. Even if a whole society ful state interference. One Liberty, then, was a prin- think an opinion false, they cation of his instance was sabbatarian leg- ciple only applicable to the still have no right to sup- free speech islation where he pronounced more advanced societies: those press it, because the opin- that it was not one person’s duty deemed ‘capable of being ions of the age are no more principles in that another should be religious. improved by free and equal dis- infallible than those of the It was also wrong to prevent cussion’. This was the condition individual. ‘It is as certain the light of free trade, for any restrictions ‘long since reached’ in what that many opinions now on trade infringe the liberty of Mill, all too vaguely, described general will be rejected their applica- the potential purchaser. Mill as ‘all nations with whom we by future ages, as it is that tion is typical pointed out how the advantages need here concern ourselves’.10 many, once general, are of free trade were conceded only For these advanced societies, rejected by the present.’14 of Mill. ‘after a long struggle’ and that in
Journal of Liberal History 64 Autumn 2009 17 john stuart mill’s on liberty 150 years later general ‘restrictions on trade, or to allow the state to provide ‘the a more homogeneous and con- on production for purposes of whole or any large part of the formist society. Yet, clearly, he trade, are indeed restraints; and education of the people’, for this wrote more than an analysis of all restraints, qua restraint, is an would produce a society all in the causes and possible conse- evil’. The extent of the doctrine, the same mould, ‘a despotism quences of mass society, for he however, was limited so as to over the mind’,19 exactly what produced what amounts to a allow the authorities to prevent Mill was most concerned to pre- manifesto of spirited resistance ‘fraud by adulteration’ and to vent. His solution was effectively to it: a call to action. He called enforce ‘sanitary precautions’ a voucher scheme for parents on individuals, especially excep- and to ‘protect workpeople unable to pay for their children’s tional individuals, to fight back employed in dangerous occu- education. This was a situation against the pressures to con- pations’.17 Mill then turned to that ideally should not occur, for formity. They should assert their another category of interference Mill (like Darwin, very influ- own distinct identity. Every where the liberty of the buyer enced by Malthus on popula- refusal to bend the knee, even made restrictions unacceptable. tion) did not consider it beyond eccentricity, was a service in the Here he denied that the export the legitimate powers of the battle against the stifling pres- of opium into China had been state to forbid marriage to cou- sures of mass society. an improper source of revenue ples deemed unable to support a It was, it seems, a fight back for the East India Company. Its family financially. by individuals alone. Mill at no sale and consumption was, after Apart from issues concern- time suggests a pressure group all, legal in Britain at that time. ing liberty itself, Mill provided or even a political party as the Mill was here implicitly taking three guiding principles against His writ- appropriate agency. So these his government’s side in the cur- government interference. The ings mark a lone individuals are trying not rent Opium War of 1856–60. first involved those situations just to withstand but even to Another area that deeply con- where the task would be bet- transition counteract the dominance of cerned Mill was that of educa- ter performed by individuals a mass society that has all the tion. His own education had than by the government; the between major tendencies of the age aug- been quite extraordinary. He second, where it was desirable, menting it: technology, com- had never been to school but in terms of personal develop- the so-called munications and education. It is had his father’s rigorous regime ment and education, that indi- classical rather hard to see how the few imposed on him. This involved viduals should act; and, as for the can have a chance against the commencing Greek at the age third, ‘the most cogent reason liberal politi- many, especially so when, in his of three and Latin at the age of for restricting the interference view, the few want liberty but eight in a childhood without of government is the great evil cal economy the many are indifferent to it. It either playthings or the com- of adding unnecessarily to its is hard to tell the extent to which pany, so he said, of other boys power’.20 In On Liberty, as earlier of Adam Mill considered the precise tac- (although his brothers must in Principles of Political Economy, Smith and tics of the proposed fight-back, have been around). In his Auto- Mill’s writings on the state were but we may surmise that, like biography, Mill mentioned that marked more by pragmatism his father’s minority individual behaviour ‘no holidays were allowed, lest than dogmatism. For example, today, such as Mohican haircuts the habit of work should be he basically favoured laissez- friend David or body piercing, the more peo- broken, and a taste for idleness faire but found grounds for con- ple do it the easier and more tol- acquired’.18 When he was thir- siderable modifications. In terms Ricardo and erable it becomes. teen his father informed him of the conventional categories the later that he knew more than other this did not so much distance boys of his age. It must still have Mill from liberalism as indicate ‘New Liberal- Reception come as rather a shock to learn his place within it. His writings In 1859 Queen Victoria’s speech that many children received mark a transition between the ism’ associ- opening the new session of par- very little education or even so-called classical liberal politi- liament included the following none at all. This situation had cal economy of Adam Smith and ated first note of serenity: ‘I am happy to to be remedied, and here the his father’s friend David Ricardo with T. H. think that, in the internal state state had a responsibility. ‘Is and the later ‘New Liberalism’ of the country, there is nothing it’, he asked, ‘not almost a self- associated first with T. H. Green Green and to excite disquietude and much evident axiom, that the State and then with J. A. Hobson and to call for satisfaction and thank- should require and compel the L. T. Hobhouse. then with fulness’.21 This was not Mill’s education, up to a certain stand- view. At perhaps the height of ard, of every human being who J. A. Hobson British pre-eminence he had is born its citizen?’ The state, Fight-back and L. T. sounded a highly discordant though, should facilitate more Mill had suggested how social note: that those factors which than provide. It would be wrong developments were producing Hobhouse. had produced global dominance
18 Journal of Liberal History 64 Autumn 2009 john stuart mill’s on liberty 150 years later were ceasing to operate. For His status that Mill bemoaned? Contem- justify them’.25 This amounts to his contemporaries this was porary critics could not see it, indicating that an individual’s so implausible that they barely among for orthodoxies impose little religion, or lack of it, is nobody responded. They did, how- respectable constraint on the orthodox. else’s business. ever, answer the ‘mass society’ Limitations on free thought are On the issue of sexual equal- charge – and totally rejected the opinion may mainly apparent to those with ity, Mill noted that the ‘almost notion that people were becom- controversial beliefs and there despotic power of husbands over ing more alike. Mill’s foremost be compared were two respects in which wives needs not be enlarged contemporary critic, the lawyer Mill held subversive views on upon here, because nothing James Fitzjames Stephen, found to that of highly sensitive topics: religion more is needed for the com- no evidence of widespread con- Russell and and sexual equality. It is fairly plete removal of the evil than formity or similarity: clear that the intolerance of that wives should have the same Sartre in which Mill complained related rights, and should receive the I should certainly not agree to religion. He mentioned protection of law in the same with Mr Mill’s opinion that the third that in 1857 two people were manner, as all other persons’,26 English people in general are rejected as jurymen ‘and one which was very much not the dull, deficient in original- quarter of of them grossly insulted by the case at the time. Mill’s The Sub- ity, and as like each other as the twenti- judge and by one of the counsel, jection of Women appeared ten herrings in a barrel appear to because they honestly declared years later and can be seen as an us. Many and many a fisher- eth century: that they had no theological extended discussion of this same man, common sailor, work- belief’. Denial of the right to principle. It was the only one of man, labourer, gamekeeper, acknowl- give evidence in a court of law his books on which the publisher policeman, non-commissioned to those who do not believe in lost money, although it is now officer, servant, and small clerk edged as a God was, said Mill, ‘equivalent acknowledged as a feminist clas- have I known who were just as great mind to declaring such persons to be sic, and, indeed, the only one to distinct from each other, just as outlaws’ who could be ‘robbed be written by a man. Ironically, original in their own way, just but seen as or assaulted with impunity … its initial reception precisely as full of character, as men in a if the proof of the fact depends confirmed Mill’s point concern- higher rank in life.22 rather way- on their evidence’.24 Religious ing society’s scathing intolerance speculation was both socially of divergent opinions. So the important corollary, that ward in cer- unacceptable and also circum- Mill died in 1873. The Times sameness threatened decline, tain respects. scribed by the laws against blas- granted him an obituary but it was not even considered. On phemous libel. Unbelief was was not exactly respectful. His Liberty was an instant success in then the intellectual sin that status among respectable opin- that it attracted much interest dare not speak its name. ion may be compared to that of and went into a second edition The publicity given this Russell and Sartre in the third six months after first publication. year to Darwin’s speculations quarter of the twentieth cen- It was not, however, a full criti- is a reminder of the difficul- tury: acknowledged as a great cal success, as the critics tended ties respectable Victorians had mind but seen as rather wayward to praise the philosopher yet dis- in expressing doubts not just in certain respects. sent from his opinions. Most of about religion directly but also them saw no danger in current about anything else that might conditions and suggested that have a bearing on it. Accord- 150 years later Mill’s message was actually most ing to later critics, it was on the Sir Isaiah Berlin is, to the best of needed in Spain, Italy, Portugal subject of religion that Mill felt my knowledge, the only person and Russia. It seemed to them unease at not being able to speak to have been knighted for serv- that this man living comfort- out, although in my opinion his ices to political theory. He is ably in Blackheath had adopted Chapter Two, ‘Of the Liberty of also one of the most significant the tone of a dissident impris- Thought and Discussion’, is as liberal thinkers of the second oned by a despotic government. bold and explicit as could rea- half of the twentieth century, This rather missed the point, for sonably be expected. In a later so his judgements have no lit- Mill’s complaint about his own chapter his call for toleration tle authority. He once described country focused more on the includes the marvellous state- Mill as the man who ‘founded society than the state: ‘in Eng- ment, still sadly all too relevant modern liberalism’ and On Lib- land … the yoke of opinion is today, that ‘the notion that it erty as ‘the classic statement of perhaps heavier, that of law is is one man’s duty that another the case for individual liberty’.27 lighter, than in most other coun- should be religious, was the These are standard viewpoints tries in Europe’.23 foundation of all the religious and so it is very much in order Anyway, where was this persecutions ever perpetrated, to note and celebrate the 150th suppression of free thought and, if admitted, would fully anniversary of the book’s
Journal of Liberal History 64 Autumn 2009 19 john stuart mill’s on liberty 150 years later
Shetty on Big Brother, Jonathan the lessons of On Liberty would Further reading Ross and Russell Brand discuss- retain their value for a long Paperback editions of On Liberty have been published ing a particular sexual conquest, time. He was right. by Penguin Books, Cambridge University Press, Hackett, and Carol Thatcher using a rac- Pearson Longman and Oxford University Press. ist term in a BBC ‘green room’. Michael Levin is Emeritus Reader An extensive scholarly debate exists concerning various There is also the unresolved in Politics at Goldsmiths College, matters of interpretation. What counts as harm? Is On issue of when society has a right University of London. He is the Liberty really the utilitarian work that Mill declared it to to interfere with individual author of J. S. Mill on Civiliza- be? Is liberty a means or an end? How liberal was Mill? actions. To take just one exam- tion and Barbarism (Routledge, These and other issues are explored in the secondary ple, only at first blink can we 2004) and contributed to D. Brack literature. Particularly worthy of attention are: regard drug-taking as a self- and E. Randall (eds.), Diction- • I. Berlin, ‘John Stuart Mill and the Ends of Life’ in Four regarding action. A moment’s ary of Liberal Thought (Politico’s, Essays on Liberty (Oxford University Press) reflection will recall the con- 2007). He is also a Convenor of the • J. Gray, Mill on Liberty: A Defence (Routledge) sequences for families, employ- Seminar in the History of Politi- • J. Hamburger, John Stuart Mill on Liberty and Control ers and the health services. Mill cal Thought, Institute of Historical (Princeton University Press) • J. Riley, Mill on Liberty (Routledge) recognised this and saw that Research, University of London. • A. Ryan, J. S .Mill (Routledge and Kegan Paul) such consequences transfer the • J. Skorupski, ed. The Cambridge Companion to Mill initial action into the other- 1 S. Collini ed., J. S. Mill, On Lib- (Cambridge University Press) regarding category. So are erty and Other Writings, [henceforth • J. Skorupski, Why Read Mill Today? (Routledge) clear-cut self-regarding actions OL] (Cambridge University Press, The most recent biography of Mill – John Stuart Mill, so trivial that they fail to pro- 1989), p. 66. Victorian Firebrand (Atlantic Books, 2007) by Richard vide the significant dividing 2 Ibid., p. 8. Reeves – was reviewed by Eugenio F. Biagini in Journal of Liberal History 60, Autumn 2008. line that the defence of individ- 3 Ibid., p. 60. uality requires? A more difficult 4 Ibid., p. 36. example is the case of the nude 5 Ibid., p. 72. publication. It would, how- walker who seems to continue, 6 Ibid., p. 59. ever, be contrary to the spirit undaunted by the punishments 7 Ibid., p. 13. of Mill himself to revere him he receives. Does he cause 8 Ibid. as an infallible authority. He harm to others in ways that jus- 9 Ibid., pp. 13–14. noted that the opinions of one tify suppression? And to what 10 Ibid., p. 14. age are not those of another and extent have we a right to be 11 Ibid., p. 20. so, not surprisingly, some of his offensive? In multi-faith Britain 12 Ibid. views are no longer acceptable. this is a particularly moot point 13 Ibid., p. 21. His advocacy of liberal impe- with regard to religious and 14 Ibid., p. 22. rialism now seems less liberal anti-religious opinions. In 2005 15 Ibid., p. 53. than it did then, as does his the play Bezhti was withdrawn 16 Ibid., p. 56. declaration that the message of from the Birmingham reper- 17 Ibid., p. 95. On Liberty was not for ‘back- tory theatre due to the actions 18 Autobiography, in John Stuart Mill ward states of society’. Also, in of Sikh protesters. This year the Collected Works (University of terms of defending individual Dutch MP Geert Wilders was Toronto Press, 1981), vol. 1, p. 39. liberty, his utilitarian heritage refused entry to this country for 19 OL, pp. 105, 106. has lost out to the more fashion- a showing in the House of Lords 20 Ibid., p. 110. able notion of universal human of his film Fitna, which linked 21 Annual Register 1859, (London: rights. However, his views on Muslim violence with verses in Longman, 1860), p. 3. religious toleration and sexual the Koran. On various issues 22 J. Fitzjames Stephen, Liberty, Equal- equality are clearly, partially you might draw the line dif- ity, Fraternity [1873] (Indianapolis: through his own efforts, more ferently from where Mill did, Liberty Fund, 1993), p. 158. acceptable today than when he but somewhere a line always 23 OL, p. 12. wrote about them. has to be drawn and justified, 24 Ibid., p. 32. Furthermore Mill raised and so the concerns he raised 25 Ibid., pp. 90–91. vital issues that still concern will remain with us. On many 26 Ibid., p. 105. us. His treatment of the lim- of these issues there are clearly 27 I. Berlin, ‘John Stuart Mill and the its of free speech is even more no easy answers, but Mill cer- Ends of Life’ in Four Essays on Lib- relevant today when the media tainly asked all the right ques- erty (London: Oxford University are so much more extended and tions. Some of his principles Press, 1984), pp. 173, 174. influential. Consider, for exam- concerning freedom have stood 28 Autobiography, p. 260. ple, the issues raised by ‘speech the test of time and it is hard codes’, ‘political correctness’, to see them being superseded; Salman Rushdie and Satanic others remain as valuable start- Verses, Jade Goody versus Shilpa ing points. Mill ‘feared’28 that
20 Journal of Liberal History 64 Autumn 2009