Theory of Mill as Advanced in On Liberty - Essay Example

MILL’S THEORY AS ADVANCED IN ‘ON LIBERTY by John Stuart Mill’s theory “on liberty” is a theory that looks at the extent to which power can be exercised on an individual by the community or society, who should exercise the power and when to exercise power (Mill, 2010:23). In this theory, Mill states that liberty is not given to all people and neither is it given to all societies. The Project Gutenberg EBook of On Liberty, by John Stuart Mill, does not examine liberty on will but it looks at the social or civil liberty. The essay shows how liberty is affected by the authority, the classes of the people and their government. It enlightens people on how the weaker people are preyed upon by those stronger I the society leading to some people having their right of liberty being violated. Mill in this theory describes the various factors that affect the liberty of people. Although Mill states several issues that arise when liberty is talked about, his theory can be termed as imperfect since he fails to consider poverty and social constraints. He does not show how social constrains and poverty influences the liberty of an individual or a society (Weir, 2007:34). The argument on the theory being imperfect is a solid one since poverty is one of the things that can lead to one being deprived on their liberty. From the essay, the people started to see that it was better if some of the magistrates and the governors of the states were tenants to them. This was better because they would not abuse the offices since the tenant hood was revocable anytime (Mill, 2002:47). But then, this would only be possible for those that were wealthy enough to be landlords and landladies, meaning that the poor in this society would not benefit from this kind of setting. These people are forced to submit to the governors and magistrates even when they are not harming anybody since this people that are in power see that they have nothing to lose because they are not tenants to the poor. Mill did not look at what would happen to the poor and therefore he did not include poverty in this theory, and thus rendering it flawed. Those living under high poverty conditions fail to see that the government’s opinion is also their opinion and therefore their liberty is at risk. According to John Stuart Mill, the liberty does not just apply to adults only, but also apply to children and all those that are in a state in which they require to be protected against harming themselves. At times, the poor are ignorant and therefore they rarely take care of such people and the children and therefore this theory fails to apply on their case (Frieden, 2010:34). Social constraints such as unemployment give those that are poor no time to protect these individuals as they spend so much of their time trying to find unemployment. The theory does address the issue of liberty among the children and individuals that need to be under the care of others, but does not go deep into considering what goes on around those that are in poverty stricken areas or socially constrained people and therefore giving more basis to the argument against mill’s theory. The poor also luck education and therefore they fail to get enlighten on their right of liberty, something that Mill should have noted in his theory. They luck a means of getting to connect with the rest of the world so that they can get to understand what they are entitled to when individual and society liberty is talked about (Wiland, 2001:45). They also do not know when power should be exercised over their liberty and by whom. If the theory would have considered the two issues, then it would be much more understandable, how the theory on liberty works for all individuals in a society regardless of their social or wealth status. In most cases, poverty leads to people being ignorant on what happens around them or on matters regarding their liberty. Due to poverty, some people fail to get information on their individual liberty since it is like they are in their own separate world. In my opinion, I agree with the argument that Mill’s theory is flawed since the writer did not give his speculation on how such people should be helped to understand their liberty. The result of this ignorance is that these people end up being taken advantage of by others that totally understand the matters on liberty (Riley, 1998:27). The theory therefore does not cover all aspects of liberty. Again, the poor people are the ones who are mainly faced with social constraints and therefore leading to more of their liberty being abused or they are unable to understand the difference between civil liberty and individual liberty. Social constraints such as the ranks of the people in a society play a major role on the exercising of power. Those that are of higher ranks or higher social status may not mind about the welfare of the people of lower ranks, leading to violation of liberty. The organization of some societies allow this to happen, hence it is only those of high ranks who enjoy their liberty. This is a major issue that makes mill’s theory weak The essay talks about a civilized society whereby power can be exercised over the liberty of an individual, against their will. But then, when the issue of poverty is brought about, it is rare to find civilization among the poor (Miller, 2001:32). This raises a concern about how these people get to understand when and how to exercise power over individuals to prevent them from harming themselves or harming others. The poor are used to some level of bad conduct that can be termed us doing evil to others in a civilized society. Since these individuals are used to these misconduct, they may not try to stop one from harming others since to them it is normal for them to behave like so. Lower social classes in a community’s social organization hardly concentrate on matters regarding to who has a right to exercise power over them and at when they should thus leaving them vulnerable to liberty violation. Therefore this is another matter that Mill’s theory on liberty does not address therefore raising questions on the effectiveness of this theory. Such questions include, who exercises power over the individuals that try to harm others, why do those that are poor allow some evils to prevail among others. (Gray, 1991:54) Liberty is not always allowed for all people since at times the poor in our societies face discrimination and therefore rendering them weak in the society. In this sense, the weak are taken advantage of in the society, an issue that Mill should have raised in his theory. The strong people in the society exercise power over those that are poor even when it is not needed (Tercheck, 2001:78). The poor find themselves in a situation whereby they do not have a chance to enjoy their individual liberty and when they are in a society faced with poverty then they can also not enjoy civil liberty. Social constraints among them are rampant meaning that they spend a lot of time trying to work on these constraints, and they end up getting deprived of their liberty by those in government and those that are wealthy. This shows that this theory does not fully address the issues of liberty in a society, given the problem of poverty and social constraints. The groups of people that are poor are sometimes pushed to the extreme and they fail to realize that they have a liberty to free discussion and raise their concern. The poor are left without a voice in the society since they are much more concerned with their issues. Mill’s theory as advanced in ‘On Liberty’ is flawed because of its failure to consider poverty and other social constraints. It is not realistic for a theory to address issues of the exercise of power by an individual on the community or society, the persons that should exercise the power and when to exercise power without considering poverty and other social constraints because such issues are directly linked to the issue of power. In most cases, poverty is as a result of bad governance of ill use of power which comes with other social constraints such as corruption. Mill provides a half baked theory by addressing issues of liberty and power and leaving out social constraints. A theory cannot just address the positive issues of power and fail to highlight the negative aspects and purport to be complete and sensible. It is clear that there exists a link between private problems, such as poverty experienced by individuals and public issues such as power. This is the gist of sociological imagination and when Mill fails to include this in his theory then it is considered flawed (Miller, 2007:19). In conclusion, John Stuart Mill’s theory “on liberty” is a theory that looks at the extent to which power can be exercised on an individual by the community or society, who should exercise the power and when to exercise power. I fully support the argument that the theory is faulty because it does not put into consideration social constraints and poverty. Mill’s theory omits several aspects that are there in every society, and these are issues that either directly or indirectly affect civil and individual liberty. In the application of liberty in chapter five of this essay, the subject of free trade is brought about. In most cases liberty rarely prevails in free trade. The writer of the essay should have shown how poverty affects free trade and liberty. Mill totally omits two very important things in all societies. The theory, therefore, cannot be completely relied upon when it comes on matters of liberty, both individual and civil. Although the theory does give a lot of information on the liberty and extent to which power should be exercised, its information is incomplete. John Stuart Mill should have included more information on social constraints and poverty so as to complete the information in the essay. A few adjustments to the issues that include some details on how poverty affects liberty and how people living in poverty have their liberty at risk should also be added in the essay so as make its argument stronger. Matters regarding to social status and social organization in a community should also be included in the essay so that the theory can be termed as convincing and concrete. Reference List Mill, J S 2002, The basic writings of John Stuart Mill. New York: Modern Library. Gray, J, Smith, G W, & Mill, J S 1991, J.S. Mill, On liberty in focus. London: Routledge. Riley, J 1998, Mill on liberty. London: Routledge. Wiland, E 2001, Joseph Hamburger, John Stuart Mill on Liberty and Control :John Stuart Mill on Liberty and Control. Ethics. doi:10.1086/233538 Terchek, R J 2000, The Limits of Mills Tolerance Joseph Hamburger, John Stuart Mill on Liberty and Control. The Review of Politics. doi:10.1017/S003467050004170X Frieden, J A, Lake, D A, & Broz, J L 2010, International political economy: Perspectives on global power and wealth. New York: W. W. Norton & Co. Weir, R E 2007, Class in America: An encyclopedia. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press. Mill, J S 2007, Utilitarianism, liberty & representative government. Wildside Press LLC. Mill, J S 2010, On liberty and other essays. Digireads. com Publishing. Read More