Mills Position on Paternalism essays

Mill's Position on Paternalism essays John Stuart Mill, by way of his work, On Liberty, questions the extent to which government should be able to interfere with the liberties of its citizens. The crucial concern for Mill is where the state should draw the line, at the individual level, with regard to its desires to determine what is best for the citizen and thus society as a whole. As a result of his recognition of the shortcomings of representative democracy, the establishment of his Harm Principle, adherence to utilitarianism, and investigations of liberties of thought and action, Mill confidently, and legitimately, asserts that state paternalism is never justified. Mill has no qualms of questioning the very system that he devotes much time in other essays defending representational government. His concern is that merely arriving at the system is not enough and, it follows, consideration must be given to the shortcomings of the very system. One of the primary inadequacies of such a system, of course, is its disregard of the eclectic composition of the citizenry which gives rise to such circumstances of detriment like the infamous tyranny of the majority. Mill logically points out that in all situations wherein a majority is established the minority will be subject, by and large, to unjust laws. Mill therefore constructs a mechanism by which, he thinks, all citizens, whether within the comforts of the majority or anxieties of the minority, will benefit. This desire and its holistic nature largely arises out of the Millian view that simply because the people govern in a democracy does not mean that there should be no limitations imposed upon t he state. The people state can be wrong. At this conclusion, the naissance of the Harm Principle takes place. Mills Harm Principle, in a comprehensive fashion, draws that line of state intervention with the liberties of the citizen. According to Mill, The princi...