On Liberty

- John Stuart Mill

The introductory part of the book is taken up for analysis. There are two types of liberty
❖ civil liberty
❖ social liberty

Civil liberty

In this essay the author analyses the nature and limit of the power which can be
exercised legitimately over an individual by the government or the society in accordance with
the civil liberty and social liberty respectively.

Mill opines that struggle between liberty and authority remains a constant factor from
the ancient periods to the present. In ancient Greece and Rome, the rulers were considered to
be antagonistic to the ruled and there was a great divide between them. Slowly, over time, the
control of authority was divided into two rights of the citizens and the “establishment of
constitutional checks with people’s consent”. These were considered as people’s duties and
they became the Government’s power. Society’s political control kept changing from
monarchy to despotism to democracy.

Mill criticizes democracy as the “tyranny of the majority”. Before democracies came
into being, people were controlled by monarchs some despotic, some good. By bringing in
democracy, people sought to have control over the delegates to be elected and to have control
over the government. The rulers come from the people and “there was no fear of its tyrannizing
over itself”

The concept of democracy was good but when it started working, phrases like “self
government”, “the power of the people over themselves”, etc., came to mean “the power of
few over many” and Mills said “like other tyrannies, the tyranny of the majorities was at first,
and is still vulgarly held in dread”.

Social control

Tyranny of the majority, says Mill is not limited to political function. One can protect
oneself from a tyrant, but it is very difficult to be protected “against the tyrant of the prevailing
opinion and feeling”. Social control over people is more dangerous than political control. In a
society, there can be no safeguard in law against the tyranny of the majority. According to Mill,
it is the majority opinion that will prevail and it need not be the correct opinion. He opines that
of the two civil liberty and social liberty, it is more difficult to protect yourself against social
liberty.

CONCLUSION
 Liberty is dear to every individual. According to Mill it shall not be given to children
and barbarian nations. Even despots like Charlemagne and Akbar the Great, though hailed as
the great rulers are not to be given liberty, or their subjects. Apart from them it may be given
to all and a person’s liberty may be restricted only when he is harmful to others. Otherwise, an
individual has all rights over his body and mind. This standard is solely based on utility. In the
words of Mill, a person’s liberty may be restricted on the condition that, “the only purpose for
which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against
his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not a sufficient
warrant. Over himself, over his body and mind, the individual is sovereign”.

In the conclusion of the introductory chapter, Mill prioritises three basic liberties in the
order of importance:

❖ The freedom of thoughts and emotions which includes the freedom of speech emanating
from freedom of thought.

❖ The freedom to pursue taste (provided they do no harm to others), even if they are
deemed “immoral”.

❖ The freedom to unite so long as the involved members are of age, the involved members
are not forced and no harm is done to others Finally Mill says that in contemporary and
civilized societies removal of these freedoms cannot be justified.