How Does John Stuart Mill Contribute To Individual Freedom

Over the decades, minorities were victims of liberty oppression by societies where the sense of freedom was limited and was only allowed for powerful groups. Minorities had to fight for a right that they owned since birth, but it was taken away from them by the misuse of authority. Two fundamental supporters of individual liberty and human rights were Martin Luther King and John Stuart Mill, helping minorities acquiring self-development in a world where injustice is continuous and regulations only serve those who can take advantage of them. Their approaches to individual freedom agreed in how freedom should be practiced in order to be justice or unjust. As demonstrated by White (2000) and Melvin (198), they agreed that freedom not only consists

As demonstrated in this fragment from Liberty by Mill, he argues “Thirdly from liberty of each individual follows the liberty within the same limits, of combination among individuals; freedom to unite, for any purpose not involving harm to others” (White, 2000, p.342). This passage highlights the importance of being wise with our motives because good actions develop into happiness for the majority of the people. In contrast, a greedy one might provoke disorder in the community, and supporting women’s rights and giving women their natural rights creates a good for all citizens and no only males will benefit from the practice of the

342). This claims that sometimes laws take the shape of fallacies to stop a strong and pure opinion to be developed. The only purpose where power can be practiced to suspend a criteria is when the former represents harm to others and authority is needed to stop the abuse of “liberty” as is shown in the essay On Liberty (White, 2000, p. 342). However, there is a need to clarify that authority has no right to stop an opinion simply it does not benefit the tyranny of the majority and in this case pacifist demonstrations are needed. This is because refusing to hear an opinion that we don’t agree with is proclaiming that our opinion is absolute and there is not such a thing as an absolute truth because what is true for one person might not be true for another and no opinion has more value than other. As Mill claims “To refuse a hearing to an opinion, because they are sure that it is false, is to assume that their certainty is the same thing as absolute certainty” (White, 2000, p.