John Stuart Mill (1801-1856) was the British philosopher, political theorist and economist whose works have influenced the social and political context significantly. He has been one of the prominent thinkers on liberal philosophy and is still regarded as a distinguished identity within the liberal school of thought. His ideas have given a new dimension to the already established by his predecessors like Jeremy Bentham’s utilitarianism. His prominent works include, On Liberty, Representative Government, Principles of Political Economy, A System of Logic, Utilitarianism, Three essays on Religion, The Subjection of Women and his Autobiography. Apart from these significant works, many of his writings, letters and newspaper articles also form …show more content…
Mill basically inherited the anti-imperialist views from his predecessor liberal thinkers like Bentham, James Mill and Adam Smith (Sullivan, 1983). Bentham, James Mill and Smith have argued against imperialism and have negated the idea that it serves any economic profit to England. Instead they believed that colonisation led to disproportionate capital flow to colonies. They also negated the argument of colonies being an outlet for capital surplus. They maintained that colonisation can only be a remedy for capital surplus if greater amount of England’s capital is not invested in governance of colonies which they regarded is the case with most of the England’s colonies. Though, English liberals kept India at exception to these arguments against imperialism. Smith maintained somewhat flexible position through his argument of free trade and India being one of the free-trading partners of England if trading monopoly of East India Company were removed. Bentham and James Mill regarded England’s imperialist relations with India only for the betterment of Indians and their civilisation and not for England since it led to large pooling off of money in India’s …show more content…
These systems initiated the whole process of landlordism which was closely inspired from principles of individualism which marks the liberal ideas as promoted by Bentham, James Mill, Ricardo and later by J S Mill. This individualism deeply rooted in the idea of individual rights, which were secured through legislations strengthened the western liberal values which Mill envisaged for the development of traditional societies. This individualism through ownership of land holdings created a class of natives who supported and strengthened British rule in India. This is in particular with Permanent settlement, where class of landowners initiated the process of capital accumulation which led to initiation of industrial growth and emergence of class of middlemen who whole heartedly supported British rule in India. Mill himself while explaining the land settlement in Punjab explains that the process led to the “peace and security never before known in the province; a rapid increase of cultivation and production; and a contentment with our rule, which has enabled this newly-conquered territory, inhabited by the most warlike population of India, to become the base of our operations for the recovery of our older territories, and has made the Sikhs, so lately in arms against us, an important
Most of the governmental systems didn’t help the indians in fact the things Britain put into place for india only made india profitable for britain. While the British believed that they helped India by setting up a government and military system India disagreed. In fact, they believed that britain caused problems in the Indian way of life. An example of this is british imperial rule established the framework for India 's justice system (Lalvani).
Granted Dr. Lalvani would say the british created an unblemished government that worked in everyone’s favor it was oppressive towards Indian people due to the fact that they were not involved in the making of laws that directly affected them. In paragraph
The British rulers of India helped settle 500 million diverse peoples with different religions all over India during their rulership, providing stronger communities held together by values of religion (Paragraph 6). However, the people of India were given little to no responsibility of themselves and their own nation (Document 1). Meaning the British also created a great divide of the native people and the British imperialists get to dictate what taxes and laws exist, all of which to only better the lives of themselves and did not pertain to the basic human needs for the people who actually lived in India. Paragraph 12 shows that the British did bring several different states of India into one unified nation to help establish an effective justice system, civil service, loyal army, and efficient police force to protect the people of India. On the other hand, document 2 shows that the Indians had no say in the taxes they had to pay to the British or how they spent their money as a nation.
The many Imperial Policies placed on the colonists by England between 1763 and 1776 resulted in mass protest from the thirteen colonies. The colonists resisted the many Acts and Taxes placed on them by forming rebel groups and using many methods to try and undermine British authority. They also did not agree with England’s government and sought to create their own. An analysis of British Imperial Policies in the late 1700s reveals that they intensified colonial resistance to British rule and fortified their commitment to republican values.
John Stuart Mill was a philosopher, political economist and civil servant in the 19th century . Mill is a Liberalist, which means that he believed that the government should not influence our personal choices as equal citizens of a society. John Mill was also a Utilitarian,
Alfred T. Mahan and John Fisk worked together. Mahan pushed for conquering the new frontiers while Fisk wanted to take the newly conquered places and make them one hundred percent english. Frederick Jackson Turner and Herbert Spencer worked together too. Spencer preached about survival of the fittest and that if America wanted to survive she needed to continue to gain territory and power in order to be on top and Turner wanted to continue conquering new frontiers to stay strong and American. All of these philosophers justified imperialism in their own ways.
British rule over india as a colonial state was effective and precise in the eyes of British supporters, but it was only this way through its discriminatory measures, separating Indians as well as creating conflict, and was thusly not in the benefit of India’s natives. At first glance, it may seem that Indians were advanced by the efficient rule which the colonists employed(Lalvani). However, this governing body was led by a tiny minority of native Indians, outnumbered 1 to 15 by British invaders( Document #2). This left them all but voiceless as the British installed drastic laws such as the Rowlatt Act, meant to disempower aboriginals by allowing the British to imprison supposed terrorists, meaning protesters, without a trial(Gandhi). Still, the British feared further revolt among Indians, and with so few of them there to enforce their laws they needed a police force staffed by the very people they sought to oppress.
When they go, they carry all they have gained” (Naoroji). Europeans invaded India in search for resources and took everything that the indigenous people of India fought hard for. Since the previous governments were weak, many people already lived within meager means, once the British took over, people fell into deeper poverty. “The poverty of the country grew. The standard of living fell to terribly low levels” (Nehru).
Dr.Lalvani claims that under British rule, India was modernized, giving the foundation for a government that therefore gave law and order. While this system and others were built, they were built almost entirely for British benefit and even profit. In this new government, Indians had no say in the laws being decided by the British, that were impacting them. The laws were meant to further control Indians, while the British extracted India’s wealth and flood India’s markets with textiles with the help of railroads. Wanting more and more wealth, the British logged forests to create land to grow cash crops which in the end degraded the soil making it more difficult for them to grow.
In the progressive nations directions, those places could yield tropical produce. They also develop the territory by building roads, canals, railways, and telegraphs. (Doc 2) This made it so the British practically robbed foreign lands of raw materials and took it for themselves. At the time, India's economy was centered around agriculture, which would then be exported to England.
Did you know that from 1875 to 1900 there were 26 million deaths caused by famine in India? As the East India Company (Britain) saw India growing weaker they took that as an advantage and sent troops to India and defeated them. Britain soon took power over India, They formed a group of Indian Soldiers called sepoys to join their army. Starting out, Britain improved many things, but after a while they started taking advantage of India by using their raw materials and people to grow their own empire. British Rule in India resulted in the in them taking over the government, taking all the material from the Indians and destroying their land and ending in a large amount of India's population dead because of famine.
It was not until Mill’s late teens that he began to study Jeremy Bentham and his utilitarianism theory. “Reading Bentham satisfied Mill’s cravings for scientific precision and gave him a new way of looking at social intercourse” (Buchholz 97). Mill became so intrigued with Bentham that he decided to preach the Benthamite gospel in the Westminster Review, a publication started by his father and Jeremy Bentham. Mill’s views soon changed as he grew older. It is said that Mill had a mid-life crisis at the age of twenty because he took the Bentamite precision too far and actually forgot the ultimate goal of Utilitarianism in the first place, happiness.
Introduction: John Stuart Mill essay on Consideration On representative Government, is an argument for representative government. The ideal form of government in Mill's opinion. One of the more notable ideas Mill is that the business of government representatives is not to make legislation. Instead Mill suggests that representative bodies such as parliaments and senates are best suited to be places of public debate on the various opinions held by the population and to act as watchdogs of the professionals who create and administer laws and policy.
My topic originated from reading Thomas Carlyle and John Stuart Mill 's debate in December 1849-January 1850. Both writers published anonymously in Fraser ' Magazine, with Carlyle writing a violent critique, ‘Occasional Discourse on the Negro Question’, and Mill sending in an outraged response simply entitled ‘The Negro Question’ that appeared in the following issue. Counteracting Carlyle 's very racist vision of the repartition of work among Black and White Jamaicans with arguments undermining that conception , Mill retorted But I again renounce all advantage from facts: were the whites born ever so superior in intelligence to the blacks, and competent by nature to instruct and advise them, it would not be the less monstrous to assert that
Being Free 1st draft Freedom is word used in a lot of contexts, but the official meaning of the word is “the power or right to act, speak, or think as one wants” (Freedom). Meaning that you have the right to do something, with the focus being on you as an individual. This means no one can tell you what to do, like for example a state. This is an important aspect and part of political theory. Liberty is also used and viewed as the same category of theory, and has the definition “The state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one’s behavior or political views” (Liberty).