In contemporary America, Donald Trump, is the latest example of a flaw built directly into the American political system: an electoral system in which the majority rules and there is no minority representation, because the winner takes all. Except, in the 2016 American presidential election, the majority winner did not win; Trump lost the popular vote to Clinton by over 2.8 million votes. Therefore, the Trump phenomenon is not the end of democracy as we know it, or even the end of the world. The Trump phenomenon is best understood as an “anti-establishment” threat to the sovereign people and a failure of American institutions. American institutions that exist to prevent tyranny, like the electoral college, acted as the vessel that allowed despotism
…show more content…
This is because, society can tyrannize without using political means.: “But reflecting persons perceived that when society is itself the tyrant, society collectively over the separate individuals who compose it, its means of tyrannising are not restricted to the acts which it may do by the hands of its political functionaries.” What Mill is implying here, is that the power of public opinion, can be more constraining to individuality and dissent than any law. Thus, there must be protection for people against prevailing public opinions, and the tendency of society to impose its values on others. The protection of all opinion, is necessary, because with great passion, societal customs and traditions, the tyranny of custom manifests: “The despotism of custom is everywhere the standing hindrance to human advancement, being in unceasing antagonism to that disposition to aim at something better than customary, which is called, according to circumstances, the spirit of liberty, or that of progress or improvement.” In this excerpt, Mill uses the “despotism of custom,” a synonym for tyranny of the custom. To Mill, individuality and creativity are the key to progress and innovation, yet, custom and tradition act as a straitjacket that restricts a person’s cry for his peaceful and nonviolent individuality. Customs, which are commonly held ideas of what is and what is not socially and morally acceptable, generally held by the vast majority in the society, are a great example of suppression of individuality. In some cultures, customs strict and rigid, to the point where they evolved into binding rules of conduct and belief. Therefore, customs and traditions weigh down on the individual, stifling their sense and desire to be different. Societal customs often defer experimentation with the new, preventing creativity; people are less likely to experiment with that which they
This is because, society can tyrannize without using political means.: “But reflecting persons perceived that when society is itself the tyrant, society collectively over the separate individuals who compose it, its means of tyrannising are not restricted to the acts which it may do by the hands of its political functionaries.” What Mill is implying here, is that the power of public opinion, can be more constraining to individuality and dissent than any law. Thus, there must be protection for people against prevailing public opinions, and the tendency of society to impose its values on others. The protection of all opinion, is necessary, because with great passion, societal customs and traditions, the tyranny of custom manifests: “The despotism of custom is everywhere the standing hindrance to human advancement, being in unceasing antagonism to that disposition to aim at something better than customary, which is called, according to circumstances, the spirit of liberty, or that of progress or improvement.” In this excerpt, Mill uses the “despotism of custom,” a synonym for tyranny of the custom. To Mill, individuality and creativity are the key to progress and innovation, yet, custom and tradition act as a straitjacket that restricts a person’s cry for his peaceful and nonviolent individuality. Customs, which are commonly held ideas of what is and what is not socially and morally acceptable, generally held by the vast majority in the society, are a great example of suppression of individuality. In some cultures, customs strict and rigid, to the point where they evolved into binding rules of conduct and belief. Therefore, customs and traditions weigh down on the individual, stifling their sense and desire to be different. Societal customs often defer experimentation with the new, preventing creativity; people are less likely to experiment with that which they