John Stuart Mill’s Perspective of Representative Government

JOHN STUART MILL’S PERSPECTIVE OF REPRESENTATIVE GOVERNMENT
Student’s Name
Course
Professor’s Name
Institution
Location
Date
John Stuart Mill’s Perspective of Representative Government
           John Stuart Mill Stuart was an influential thinker who did significant work on topics such as liberty, utilitarianism, and representative government, among others. The following is an account and critical analysis of how Mill supported and challenged the idea of a representative government. To critically analyze Mill’s perspectives on representative government, primary sources will be utilized to identify his arguments on the subject, and a critical commentary, supported by secondary sources, will be provided.
           In his work titled Considerations on Representative Government, Mill posited that the best form of government that would “…promote not some one improvement, but all forms and degrees of it” (Mill 1861, p. 398) is a representative government and proceeded to give reasons to support his belief. Mill believed that a representative government would give people a voice so that they could become actively engaged in designing their future and achieving their interests. Mill argued that in a representative government, every individual would take part in governance either by “having a voice in the exercise of that ultimate sovereignty” (Mill 1861, p. 403) or by partially participating in the government (Mill 1861, p. 404). Mill understood the importance of the people’s voice and participation. He knew that when the citizens’ voices were ignored, it bred restlessness and could be the government’s fall and those in power. Also, he understood the power of public opinions in driving social and political change. He noted that in other forms of government, such as the Monarchy, when the opinions of the majority were ignored, there would “arise a permanent antagonism between the people and one individual…” (Mill 1861, p. 402). However, a representative government allows individuals to air their opinions, which are then considered in determining how the needs of the citizens will be met.
           Mill’s support of a representative government was rooted in the belief that people could only meet their needs and self-interests if they were in a position to fight for those needs. Mill noted that a person “is the only safe guardian of his own rights and interest” (Mill 1861, p. 404), meaning that every man would focus on fighting for his interests. Naturally, human beings are self-centered and are more likely to focus on what they can do for themselves instead of what others can do for them. Mill understood this nature of people and believed that those in power would focus on meeting their self-interests at the expense of their subordinates, albeit unintentionally (Mill 1861, p. 405). To remedy this risk, he recommended a representative government that would allow every man to participate in the government through one action or another. As Krouse (1982, p. 528) indicates, Mill’s assertions were that the interests of the common citizen would be disregarded or go unnoticed if they did not have the ability or some degree of power to protect themselves. In the absence of proper checks and balances and through corrupt means, those in power would focus on creating wealth for themselves and advancing their interests without a care about their subordinates who have little say about the government and its activities. However, in a representative government, every citizen participates in the government by voting for their local, state, or national representative. By doing so, they have some degree of power in ensuring that these representatives are not advancing their agendas but the agenda of the public. Individuals can fight for their rights and interests by voting and electing representatives who have similar interests as them.
           Further, Mill supported a representative government by highlighting the benefits linked to citizens’ freedom within a state. First, he indicated that free states/governments were preferable and beneficial to society for two reasons. One, individuals living in free communities are less likely to experience crime and social injustices, and two, such states are more productive and successful (Mill 1861, p. 406). Mill further associated representative governments with more comfort, less ignorance among the masses, and a general shift towards improvement (Mill 1835, p. 53). He indicated that free states were doing better than despot monarchies and oligarchies for as long as they remained free (Mill 1861, p. 406). These sentiments were insightful then and are insightful now. Limited freedom of citizens hinders economic and social development. It seems that there exists a relationship between freedom and prosperity. When the goal is to meet the interests of citizens and improve their overall life, free governments are better placed to achieve this goal because they provide citizens with freedom to pursue their interests collectively. For instance, as Grollios (2011, p. 877) indicates, ...