Social Rights And Freedom In John Mill's On Liberty

John Mill’s On Liberty seeks to expound on how individuals and the society can exist as liberal entities without infringing on each other’s rights. Liberty is the condition of being free within the society, that is free from any form of restriction inflicted by authority. He argues that individual freedom is the basis of democracy where people exercise their own free will (Mill 2005). He also rejects the idea of social contract where individuals comply with society for them to gain social benefit (Mill 2005). It is generally thought that social development can only occur if certain constraints are placed on individual liberty. But the contrary is also true, if restriction are placed on people’s freedom, it becomes difficult for them to thrive

He argues that any man has the right to own ‘industry’ and that means making the industry fruitful (Burke 2014). This notion speaks to the role and significance of capitalism in motivating hard work and shaping economic growth. Property ownership is the keystone of any working society. He defends traditionalism arguing that strong institutions ensure stability and that most customs have logical reasons for existing – property ownership was one of them. Today we see that property ownership is a significant basis for a status group, especially where the market prevails. However, it is also important to note that those who acquire property may not be accorded the same status privilege as those who originally held property. One example of this is the distinction between established society and the nouveau riche. The situation of ascription and achievement is relayed here, a situation that reinstates status quo. This is precisely what Burke was arguing when he stated that conforming to traditional nature helps individuals gain benefits in light of inheritance (Burke 2014). While this was true during the enlightment stage, it has certainly changed today where we have individuals crossing social classes on the basis of

According to him, the revolutionary overthrow of capitalist is unwanted and that a revolutionary attempt to take over from capitalists would be disastrous (Bernstein 1961). For this reason, he urges that peaceful transition to socialism, what he calls ‘evolutionary socialism’ is necessary. He deemed socialism to be the middle ground between capitalism and communism. Bernstein hypothesized that the only way socialism would be implemented in developed countries was through legislative politics and trade unions. Bernstein never regarded Marxism as a science much to the distaste of its followers like Vladimir Lenin. Although he supported socialism, he challenged Marxist doctrine that capitalism was condemned pointing out that the system was gradually overcoming its shortcoming such as unemployment and poverty (Bernstein 1961). He made this declaration after witnessing real wages of laborers rising and the fact that social class difference between capitalist and the working class had not materialized. It is worth noting that during that time, capital was not concentrated on few hands (elites). Therefore, the idea of communism taking over was doubtful. However, he was not sure about this and that is why he wrote about evolutionary