John Stuart Mill's Tyrannies

A ruler or power is seen as a necessity to protect the weak from threats external and internal alike, but more often than not becomes a force against those that were meant to be protected. Still applying protection but also a sort of tyrannical pressure over the ruled. These tyrannies directly display themselves in separate yet simultaneous forms, forcing the masses at large to separate from the government and seek its own protections and/or liberties.
The first tyranny discussed is that of expression, or lack thereof, in which a government silenced the expression of thoughts and opinions. This effort was made either for its truth in which by their standard would be a lie because of the certainty in their own truth and inability to be wrong, or for failure to see …show more content…
These harmful acts are justifiably controlled and should be held to the same standards that make opinions free but in the case of actions the individual should be held accountable, with the freedom to carryout opinions at their own risk. Just as opinions and actions are linked so are their tyrannies, with actions the majority fails to see how what’s good for them is not good for the individual, correspondingly they fail to see the importance of others opinions as well.

As a solution to the tyranny of opinion Mill seeks to bring equilibrium to the discussion, all opinions should be expressed with restraint and in fair discussion on all platforms “If Christians want to teach unbelievers to be fair to Christianity, they should themselves be fair to unbelief.” and all answers should be to that of the circumstances of the original case. “…I bring them forward just as unquestionable examples of the universal fact that in the existing state of the human intellect the only chance of fair play for all sides of the truth is through diversity of opinion”. (Mill, on