HER
[fragment illegible in the scan of the first edition]
IO yy obtaining individual rights, with the achievement of a society of political freedom, is of enormous significance and partly, thanks to this achievement, Mill does not want to say that the old regime was the best means of ensuring individual freedom, but that the new order does not provide for it such guarantees as are urgently required by the very nature of the individual. Society, if we imagine it as the entire mass of the people, having acquired the right to govern itself, depriving the politically privileged classes of this prerogative, has not won a position in which each member of it could govern himself, but one in which each member can govern the whole, or, more correctly, an organized majority. Hence, even under the new order, for Mill the danger of the tyranny of the majority over the minority is clear. The responsibility of the government, as an authorized representative of the majority, nevertheless remains in force, as a check on tyranny 1). But how terrible this tyranny is if it takes the form of bondage over the individual, carried out by society itself! Society penetrates deeper into the personal lives of its members: imposes on them the unbearable yoke of monotonous submission to rights, customs, prejudices, etc. etc., eradicating all originality. D. 0. Mill touches on the very essence of the negative aspects of the political-social ‘way of life, which influence the individual despotically. In his reflections on these negative aspects, Mill has only one goal in mind: to highlight the individual; in the individual he sees the final Form of human being. And at the same time, such a form, which can be useful to human progress, is formed by its
1) Sy. Mill's treatise on this issue: “Representative Government” ch. UP--HG. Democracy will not become the best form of government if... will not be found for the minority to guarantee that the class that has become in power will be
It is in our power to deprive the minority of any political influence (Chapter U).
research institute originality. Thus, original individuals are the salt of humanity. They become capable not only of self-improvement, but also of the improvement of others, less talented and original. They are creators in the field of science and technology. This says it all regarding their significance. And if what has been said is true, then mental censorship, moral policing of the individual, on the part of society and the state, can offer only one basis against these provisions of Mill. An individual, despite all his intelligence, can easily be mistaken and infect others with his delusion. Against this, Mill makes a historical point: peoples and societies are no less capable of being in error, | chum individual But let us assume that the individual is indeed mistaken. Censorship and interference in his actions. casa-
| focusing only on individual interests and not affecting the interests of others, there will no longer be a basis because those who apply them claim to possess the complete truth. While the process of revealing the truth is accomplished just as much through free criticism of errors, || how much we separate the grain in error. truths, like that
How gold is separated from ore. History shows that even those who were mistaken brought their own benefits. No matter which side we approach the question of the individual’s relationship to the environment (social or political), we encounter, especially at the present time, a tendency to resolve it in favor of the predominance of the authority of the environment. This does not primarily meet the interests of the environment itself. If the ingredient of progress is individuality, then the source of all progress is the INDIVIDUAL., From him to go and initiate the discovery of the true and the creation of | noble. Less harassment from society and the state, more freedom and, moreover, complete freedom in everything that does not involve harm on the part of the individual
for others. This is the conclusion.
to about
and ye
It seems that such a boundary is quite vague. And it should be noted that, wanting to find such a boundary between the individual and society, Mill often resorts to political concepts and legal principles. But Mill does not raise the issue of state non-intervention in his treatise “On Liberty” 1):
He is interested here in cases of government interference in individual activities, which do not imply a violation of the individual's freedom. These are cases when the government provides assistance to citizens in matters that sometimes exceed individual strength and require collective efforts. =