Marxist Critique of Mills Account of Individual Liberty - Essay Example

Develop a Marxist critique of Mill’s account of individual liberty Introduction This essay intends to provide a criticismof Mill’s literature on individual liberty by considering the Marxist perspectives as found in The Communist Manifesto by Marx and Engels. Marxism tends to connect the current societal conditions as products of medieval class struggles. Marxism considers social, political and economical perspectives including labor theory, materialism and class struggles. Marxism considers both proletariat and the emergence of a classless society and developments to the current society. This easily will criticize the Mill’s notion on individual liberty based on these aspects. Critique of Mill’s account Mill introduces his account on individual liberty by describing the form of liberty present in his arguments. The author becomes clear to the reader by specifying the subject of the essay as that which considers both social and civil liberty. This is for the purpose of creating a succinct understanding of individual liberty as described by the author. Mill considers civilization as a struggle that occurs between a person and a society causing the individual to change behavior in an attempt to fit in the society (Mill 5). The author criticizes the public laws and opinions regarding them as determinants of the actions of individuals instead of the person having power over his own thoughts. Mill objects the idea of public laws and opinions, which affects the well-being of the society. He argues that such laws should only apply in cases where the actions of an individual directly affect the society (Mill 6). The argument of the author is that these laws cause an individual to act against his will. The author does not only argue on the laws but also on the morality of individuals. Mill is critical about the notion of public on the behavior of individuals; he does not accept the judgments that the public makes and that discriminates a person due to behavioral aspects. He terms such actions and ideas as coerce claiming that their illegitimacy is undesired. Mill’s notion that persons in the society can improve themselves in the absence of laws brings questions on whether the society can be a better place without these laws. His notion makes him regard various societies as a dwelling on an order of value (Mill 6). He sets an example of barbaric societies acting like children in the absence of necessary guidance of their independence. Mill’s expression of liberty is utilitarian rather than based on natural rights as exemplified in metaphysical opinion by Kant (Marx, Engels 40). The second chapter of Mill’s account on individual liberty articulates issues that regard freedoms of thought and opinion. The author attempts to defend the significance of such freedom by depicting a variety of social benefits. Mill believes that having a society with diverse opinions is fundamental for the well-being of the society. The extent to which dissention of opinions is possible is not clear from the author’s arguments (Mill 17). This is evident where the author argues on the existence of moral beliefs; he argues that regardless of the existence of moral believes, not all have equal validity. Mill expresses his contingency on various believes by drawing on factual aspects of the past. These facts make the reader understand the importance of respecting every view that arises. For example, the author believes that the persecution of Jesus was unfair considering that he had the belief different from the people of those times. The arguments of the author on liberty do not denounce modern views; they create an understanding of the importance of each view on various matters, such as religion. Mill argues his points in a manner that he avoids criticisms from the government (Marx, Engels 48). He does this by selecting proper words to describe his intentions. However, he ensures that the message intended to the reader is visible. The author regards the existence of truth as an assumption since no person can be wrong or right (Mill 55). Mill’s account of liberty offers different notions on the opinions and dissentions. For example, he argues that people can never possess enough truth, and should benefit by paying attention to the views of other people in order to benefit by gaining other fractions of truth. The author supports these arguments by stating that through debates and challenges of opinions, people can comprehend their own infirmities believes and strengths. His notion of dissention and criticism of opinions, however, leaves questions on whether he personally has an idea of the learning procedure he articulates (Mill 58). There are questions on whether the certain issues can be possible, for example, in the event of conflicting ideas some conversations are impossible. Mill argues that people should not believe that whole truth exists, and they should be critical on their own and others’ opinions. He thinks that a person who believes Christianity holds total truth expresses an undesired misinterpretation of the religion. Mill’s argument on belief raises questions on whether he can succeed in persuading persons, who believe in intolerance to individuals who exhibit believes or behaviors which are contrary to theirs. The author uses the aspect of social benefit to defend individual liberty hence; a person can accomplish an evil deed making the idea of social benefit questionable (Mill 135). In chapter three of his individuality accounts, the author recognizes the value of individuality and non-compliance in the context of personal and community levels. The author articulates the natural preference of compliance by the society, although this inclination becomes aggravated by the rule of people through democracy. The author believes that laws and demands from the public are deleterious in the development of an individual (Marx & Friedrich 45). This is because the laws require the person to comply leaving him without liberty to make better choices. The result of conformity is the lack of interest and desired approaches to life by persons. Mill considers conformity as a thing that stunts socialism, and that freedom allows a person to become perfect as long as he interacts with other people in the community (Mill 210). This idea leaves questions because too much liberty is subject to an undesired conduct by individuals. Chapter four of Mill’s articulations on individuality provides information on the levels of authority held by society. The chapter describes the limits of a person’s eccentricity in regard to societal rights. Mill’s arguments of punishing an individual if his conduct is harmful to others may be senseless. As the author accepts that the conduct of one person can influence others in the society, it is possible for others and the reader to outweigh the argument on the respect of eccentricity (Mill 234). Mill’s arguments, in so far, have not become clear because his support on individual liberty is partial. His articulations leave room for the restriction of individual liberty, and sometimes supporting the notion of individual liberty, a condition that confuses the reader. However, one can conclude that the author’s concern is on the well-being of the society in terms of social good. The notion of interference by the society as presented by the author is questionable. This is because the author believes that when the community intervenes, it does so in a wrong manner. However, society intervention cannot be always wrong; at times the society may be right (Mill 256). Conclusion In Mill’s description of liberty, there are arguments that explain the actions of societies in declaring justifiable activities dissolute. This leaves a room for a critique that a person can decide to do wrong because others accept the idea of him doing both wrong and right. The author argues on the issue of fallibility of community making it vital in his entire arguments (Mill 264). The author creates space for critique in the entire piece because, at some point, the reader can find a problem in his articulations. It is obvious for a piece of writing to have a room for criticism because humans are naturally skeptical (Mill 264). The author raises questions on whether to brand a certain level of punishment for wrong doing, as a natural aspect of human behavior. Works cited SparkNotes Editors. “SparkNote on The Communist Manifesto.” SparkNotes.com. SparkNotes LLC. n.d. Web. 11 Nov. 2012. Mill, John S. On Liberty and Other Essays. Lawrence, Kan: Digireads.com Publ, 2010. Print. Read More