What I Liked About J S Mills Political view
Like many philosophers Locke tried to imagine what life before society existed. According to Locke and some other philosophers society was built on a “social contract”. But JS Mill departs from this idea and said that everything was started with force.
The strong people had the force, it could have been physical strength or group strength. The strong took control of the things.
Later on, the authority and law came in, but it didn’t change much. The power structures of force that existed before were simply legitimized. In other words, law “converted a physical fact into a legal right”.
In his work On Liberty, JS Mill which was co authored by his wife Harriet Taylor, focused on how much power society should have over individuals.
They warned that it’s not just governments we should fear — society itself can become oppressive, especially when the majority tries to silence or control others. They called this the “tyranny of the majority.” Unlike the state, society’s pressure can reach into our personal lives and thoughts
Mill believed in one clear rule, known as the harm principle:
“The only purpose for which power can be rightfully used against someone is to prevent harm to others.”
That means people should be free to live as they wish, even if others disagree — as long as they’re not hurting anyone. You can criticize, disagree, or even avoid someone — but you can’t force them to stop unless they’re doing harm.
This idea wasn’t about selfishness. It was about letting people make their own choices, even if they were wrong. Moral judgement still mattered — we can try to guide each other to be better. But we shouldn't control others lives just because we dislike their choices.
Mill’s Belief in Freedom and Doubt
Mill believed that certain freedoms are untouchable:
Freedom of thought and conscience
Freedom of speech and expression
Freedom to live as you choose
Freedom to associate with whoever you want
He also deeply valued doubt. He thought real progress comes when we accept that we might be wrong, and that even our opponents might have something valuable to say. At the heart of that thought was an astonishingly humble realization: that there could be truth in the words of someone you disagreed with. Sometimes trace of elements. Sometimes it was a sizable chunk
Mill didn’t want people to live in intellectual bubbles. He encouraged open minds, international thinking, and learning from different views. He believed that by finding what’s true in other people’s arguments and combining it with your own, society could move forward.
What I love about Mill is how he defended personal freedom, but also cared about moral growth and better conversation. He didn’t say “everyone should do what they want and no one else matters.” He said we can try to guide each other — just not through force.
Also, his endeavour to understand the opponents point of view and seek truth in their argument no matter how big or small.
He believed in freedom, debate, doubt, and humility — and that’s something the world still needs today.
Source: How to Liberal by Ian Dunt
