Freedom, power and public opinion: J.S. Mill on the public sphere

History of Political Thought

Volumn 23, Issue 3, 2001, Pages 501-524

  Baum, Bruce ^a  

^a MACALESTER COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0035457501     PISSN: 0143781X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (217)

1. 3 J. Habermas, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere, trans. T. Burger, with F. Lawrence (Cambridge, MA, 1991).
2. 4 J.S. Mill, Considerations on Representative Government, in Collected Works of John Stuart Mill (Toronto, 1977), Vol. 19 (hereafter CRG), p. 436. Mill's Collected Works (Toronto, 1963-91 ) will hereafter be cited as CW.
3. 4 J.S. Mill, Considerations on Representative Government, in Collected Works of John Stuart Mill (Toronto, 1977), Vol. 19 (hereafter CRG), p. 436. Mill's Collected Works (Toronto, 1963-91 ) will hereafter be cited as CW.
4. 5 Mill, On Liberty, CW, Vol. 18 (hereafter OL), p. 228n. See also Mill, 'Law of Libel and Liberty of the Press' (1825), CW, Vol. 21; and Mill, 'The French Law Against the Press' (19 August 1848), CW, Vol. 25, pp. 1115-18.
5. 5 Mill, On Liberty, CW, Vol. 18 (hereafter OL), p. 228n. See also Mill, 'Law of Libel and Liberty of the Press' (1825), CW, Vol. 21; and Mill, 'The French Law Against the Press' (19 August 1848), CW, Vol. 25, pp. 1115-18.
6. 5 Mill, On Liberty, CW, Vol. 18 (hereafter OL), p. 228n. See also Mill, 'Law of Libel and Liberty of the Press' (1825), CW, Vol. 21; and Mill, 'The French Law Against the Press' (19 August 1848), CW, Vol. 25, pp. 1115-18.
7. 6 W. Kendall, 'The "Open Society" and its Fallacies', in Limits of Liberty: Studies of Mill's 'On Liberty', ed. P. Radcliff (Belmont, CA, 1966), pp. 27-8. Commentators who focus on this aspect of Mill's argument about freedom of thought and discussion include B. Wishy, 'Introduction', in Mill, Prefaces to Liberty, ed. B. Wishy (New York, 1959); H.J. McCloskey, 'Liberty of Expression: Its Grounds and Limits (I)', Inquiry, 13 (1970); D.H. Munro, 'Liberty of Expression: Its Grounds and Limits (II)', Inquiry, 13 (1970); T. Scanlon, 'A Theory of Freedom of Expression', Philosophy and Public Affairs, 1 (1972); R. Wollheim, 'Introduction', in Mill, Three Essays: On Liberty, Representative Government, The Subjection of Women (Oxford, 1976); F. Schauer, Free Speech: A Philosophical Enquiry (Cambridge, 1982), pp. 21-5; J. Cohen, 'Freedom of Expression', Philosophy and Public Affairs, 22 (1993), p. 229; C. Sunstein, Democracy and the Problem of Free Speech (New York, 1993), pp. 186, 272 n. 33; J. Gordon, 'John Stuart Mill and the "Marketplace of Ideas"', Social Theory and Practice, 23 (1997); R. Ladenson, 'Is the Right of Free Speech Special?', Social Theory and Practice, 23 (1997).
8. 6 W. Kendall, 'The "Open Society" and its Fallacies', in Limits of Liberty: Studies of Mill's 'On Liberty', ed. P. Radcliff (Belmont, CA, 1966), pp. 27-8. Commentators who focus on this aspect of Mill's argument about freedom of thought and discussion include B. Wishy, 'Introduction', in Mill, Prefaces to Liberty, ed. B. Wishy (New York, 1959); H.J. McCloskey, 'Liberty of Expression: Its Grounds and Limits (I)', Inquiry, 13 (1970); D.H. Munro, 'Liberty of Expression: Its Grounds and Limits (II)', Inquiry, 13 (1970); T. Scanlon, 'A Theory of Freedom of Expression', Philosophy and Public Affairs, 1 (1972); R. Wollheim, 'Introduction', in Mill, Three Essays: On Liberty, Representative Government, The Subjection of Women (Oxford, 1976); F. Schauer, Free Speech: A Philosophical Enquiry (Cambridge, 1982), pp. 21-5; J. Cohen, 'Freedom of Expression', Philosophy and Public Affairs, 22 (1993), p. 229; C. Sunstein, Democracy and the Problem of Free Speech (New York, 1993), pp. 186, 272 n. 33; J. Gordon, 'John Stuart Mill and the "Marketplace of Ideas"', Social Theory and Practice, 23 (1997); R. Ladenson, 'Is the Right of Free Speech Special?', Social Theory and Practice, 23 (1997).
9. 6 W. Kendall, 'The "Open Society" and its Fallacies', in Limits of Liberty: Studies of Mill's 'On Liberty', ed. P. Radcliff (Belmont, CA, 1966), pp. 27-8. Commentators who focus on this aspect of Mill's argument about freedom of thought and discussion include B. Wishy, 'Introduction', in Mill, Prefaces to Liberty, ed. B. Wishy (New York, 1959); H.J. McCloskey, 'Liberty of Expression: Its Grounds and Limits (I)', Inquiry, 13 (1970); D.H. Munro, 'Liberty of Expression: Its Grounds and Limits (II)', Inquiry, 13 (1970); T. Scanlon, 'A Theory of Freedom of Expression', Philosophy and Public Affairs, 1 (1972); R. Wollheim, 'Introduction', in Mill, Three Essays: On Liberty, Representative Government, The Subjection of Women (Oxford, 1976); F. Schauer, Free Speech: A Philosophical Enquiry (Cambridge, 1982), pp. 21-5; J. Cohen, 'Freedom of Expression', Philosophy and Public Affairs, 22 (1993), p. 229; C. Sunstein, Democracy and the Problem of Free Speech (New York, 1993), pp. 186, 272 n. 33; J. Gordon, 'John Stuart Mill and the "Marketplace of Ideas"', Social Theory and Practice, 23 (1997); R. Ladenson, 'Is the Right of Free Speech Special?', Social Theory and Practice, 23 (1997).
10. 6 W. Kendall, 'The "Open Society" and its Fallacies', in Limits of Liberty: Studies of Mill's 'On Liberty', ed. P. Radcliff (Belmont, CA, 1966), pp. 27-8. Commentators who focus on this aspect of Mill's argument about freedom of thought and discussion include B. Wishy, 'Introduction', in Mill, Prefaces to Liberty, ed. B. Wishy (New York, 1959); H.J. McCloskey, 'Liberty of Expression: Its Grounds and Limits (I)', Inquiry, 13 (1970); D.H. Munro, 'Liberty of Expression: Its Grounds and Limits (II)', Inquiry, 13 (1970); T. Scanlon, 'A Theory of Freedom of Expression', Philosophy and Public Affairs, 1 (1972); R. Wollheim, 'Introduction', in Mill, Three Essays: On Liberty, Representative Government, The Subjection of Women (Oxford, 1976); F. Schauer, Free Speech: A Philosophical Enquiry (Cambridge, 1982), pp. 21-5; J. Cohen, 'Freedom of Expression', Philosophy and Public Affairs, 22 (1993), p. 229; C. Sunstein, Democracy and the Problem of Free Speech (New York, 1993), pp. 186, 272 n. 33; J. Gordon, 'John Stuart Mill and the "Marketplace of Ideas"', Social Theory and Practice, 23 (1997); R. Ladenson, 'Is the Right of Free Speech Special?', Social Theory and Practice, 23 (1997).
11. 6 W. Kendall, 'The "Open Society" and its Fallacies', in Limits of Liberty: Studies of Mill's 'On Liberty', ed. P. Radcliff (Belmont, CA, 1966), pp. 27-8. Commentators who focus on this aspect of Mill's argument about freedom of thought and discussion include B. Wishy, 'Introduction', in Mill, Prefaces to Liberty, ed. B. Wishy (New York, 1959); H.J. McCloskey, 'Liberty of Expression: Its Grounds and Limits (I)', Inquiry, 13 (1970); D.H. Munro, 'Liberty of Expression: Its Grounds and Limits (II)', Inquiry, 13 (1970); T. Scanlon, 'A Theory of Freedom of Expression', Philosophy and Public Affairs, 1 (1972); R. Wollheim, 'Introduction', in Mill, Three Essays: On Liberty, Representative Government, The Subjection of Women (Oxford, 1976); F. Schauer, Free Speech: A Philosophical Enquiry (Cambridge, 1982), pp. 21-5; J. Cohen, 'Freedom of Expression', Philosophy and Public Affairs, 22 (1993), p. 229; C. Sunstein, Democracy and the Problem of Free Speech (New York, 1993), pp. 186, 272 n. 33; J. Gordon, 'John Stuart Mill and the "Marketplace of Ideas"', Social Theory and Practice, 23 (1997); R. Ladenson, 'Is the Right of Free Speech Special?', Social Theory and Practice, 23 (1997).
12. 6 W. Kendall, 'The "Open Society" and its Fallacies', in Limits of Liberty: Studies of Mill's 'On Liberty', ed. P. Radcliff (Belmont, CA, 1966), pp. 27-8. Commentators who focus on this aspect of Mill's argument about freedom of thought and discussion include B. Wishy, 'Introduction', in Mill, Prefaces to Liberty, ed. B. Wishy (New York, 1959); H.J. McCloskey, 'Liberty of Expression: Its Grounds and Limits (I)', Inquiry, 13 (1970); D.H. Munro, 'Liberty of Expression: Its Grounds and Limits (II)', Inquiry, 13 (1970); T. Scanlon, 'A Theory of Freedom of Expression', Philosophy and Public Affairs, 1 (1972); R. Wollheim, 'Introduction', in Mill, Three Essays: On Liberty, Representative Government, The Subjection of Women (Oxford, 1976); F. Schauer, Free Speech: A Philosophical Enquiry (Cambridge, 1982), pp. 21-5; J. Cohen, 'Freedom of Expression', Philosophy and Public Affairs, 22 (1993), p. 229; C. Sunstein, Democracy and the Problem of Free Speech (New York, 1993), pp. 186, 272 n. 33; J. Gordon, 'John Stuart Mill and the "Marketplace of Ideas"', Social Theory and Practice, 23 (1997); R. Ladenson, 'Is the Right of Free Speech Special?', Social Theory and Practice, 23 (1997).
13. 6 W. Kendall, 'The "Open Society" and its Fallacies', in Limits of Liberty: Studies of Mill's 'On Liberty', ed. P. Radcliff (Belmont, CA, 1966), pp. 27-8. Commentators who focus on this aspect of Mill's argument about freedom of thought and discussion include B. Wishy, 'Introduction', in Mill, Prefaces to Liberty, ed. B. Wishy (New York, 1959); H.J. McCloskey, 'Liberty of Expression: Its Grounds and Limits (I)', Inquiry, 13 (1970); D.H. Munro, 'Liberty of Expression: Its Grounds and Limits (II)', Inquiry, 13 (1970); T. Scanlon, 'A Theory of Freedom of Expression', Philosophy and Public Affairs, 1 (1972); R. Wollheim, 'Introduction', in Mill, Three Essays: On Liberty, Representative Government, The Subjection of Women (Oxford, 1976); F. Schauer, Free Speech: A Philosophical Enquiry (Cambridge, 1982), pp. 21-5; J. Cohen, 'Freedom of Expression', Philosophy and Public Affairs, 22 (1993), p. 229; C. Sunstein, Democracy and the Problem of Free Speech (New York, 1993), pp. 186, 272 n. 33; J. Gordon, 'John Stuart Mill and the "Marketplace of Ideas"', Social Theory and Practice, 23 (1997); R. Ladenson, 'Is the Right of Free Speech Special?', Social Theory and Practice, 23 (1997).
14. 6 W. Kendall, 'The "Open Society" and its Fallacies', in Limits of Liberty: Studies of Mill's 'On Liberty', ed. P. Radcliff (Belmont, CA, 1966), pp. 27-8. Commentators who focus on this aspect of Mill's argument about freedom of thought and discussion include B. Wishy, 'Introduction', in Mill, Prefaces to Liberty, ed. B. Wishy (New York, 1959); H.J. McCloskey, 'Liberty of Expression: Its Grounds and Limits (I)', Inquiry, 13 (1970); D.H. Munro, 'Liberty of Expression: Its Grounds and Limits (II)', Inquiry, 13 (1970); T. Scanlon, 'A Theory of Freedom of Expression', Philosophy and Public Affairs, 1 (1972); R. Wollheim, 'Introduction', in Mill, Three Essays: On Liberty, Representative Government, The Subjection of Women (Oxford, 1976); F. Schauer, Free Speech: A Philosophical Enquiry (Cambridge, 1982), pp. 21-5; J. Cohen, 'Freedom of Expression', Philosophy and Public Affairs, 22 (1993), p. 229; C. Sunstein, Democracy and the Problem of Free Speech (New York, 1993), pp. 186, 272 n. 33; J. Gordon, 'John Stuart Mill and the "Marketplace of Ideas"', Social Theory and Practice, 23 (1997); R. Ladenson, 'Is the Right of Free Speech Special?', Social Theory and Practice, 23 (1997).
15. 6 W. Kendall, 'The "Open Society" and its Fallacies', in Limits of Liberty: Studies of Mill's 'On Liberty', ed. P. Radcliff (Belmont, CA, 1966), pp. 27-8. Commentators who focus on this aspect of Mill's argument about freedom of thought and discussion include B. Wishy, 'Introduction', in Mill, Prefaces to Liberty, ed. B. Wishy (New York, 1959); H.J. McCloskey, 'Liberty of Expression: Its Grounds and Limits (I)', Inquiry, 13 (1970); D.H. Munro, 'Liberty of Expression: Its Grounds and Limits (II)', Inquiry, 13 (1970); T. Scanlon, 'A Theory of Freedom of Expression', Philosophy and Public Affairs, 1 (1972); R. Wollheim, 'Introduction', in Mill, Three Essays: On Liberty, Representative Government, The Subjection of Women (Oxford, 1976); F. Schauer, Free Speech: A Philosophical Enquiry (Cambridge, 1982), pp. 21-5; J. Cohen, 'Freedom of Expression', Philosophy and Public Affairs, 22 (1993), p. 229; C. Sunstein, Democracy and the Problem of Free Speech (New York, 1993), pp. 186, 272 n. 33; J. Gordon, 'John Stuart Mill and the "Marketplace of Ideas"', Social Theory and Practice, 23 (1997); R. Ladenson, 'Is the Right of Free Speech Special?', Social Theory and Practice, 23 (1997).
16. 6 W. Kendall, 'The "Open Society" and its Fallacies', in Limits of Liberty: Studies of Mill's 'On Liberty', ed. P. Radcliff (Belmont, CA, 1966), pp. 27-8. Commentators who focus on this aspect of Mill's argument about freedom of thought and discussion include B. Wishy, 'Introduction', in Mill, Prefaces to Liberty, ed. B. Wishy (New York, 1959); H.J. McCloskey, 'Liberty of Expression: Its Grounds and Limits (I)', Inquiry, 13 (1970); D.H. Munro, 'Liberty of Expression: Its Grounds and Limits (II)', Inquiry, 13 (1970); T. Scanlon, 'A Theory of Freedom of Expression', Philosophy and Public Affairs, 1 (1972); R. Wollheim, 'Introduction', in Mill, Three Essays: On Liberty, Representative Government, The Subjection of Women (Oxford, 1976); F. Schauer, Free Speech: A Philosophical Enquiry (Cambridge, 1982), pp. 21-5; J. Cohen, 'Freedom of Expression', Philosophy and Public Affairs, 22 (1993), p. 229; C. Sunstein, Democracy and the Problem of Free Speech (New York, 1993), pp. 186, 272 n. 33; J. Gordon, 'John Stuart Mill and the "Marketplace of Ideas"', Social Theory and Practice, 23 (1997); R. Ladenson, 'Is the Right of Free Speech Special?', Social Theory and Practice, 23 (1997).
17. 6 W. Kendall, 'The "Open Society" and its Fallacies', in Limits of Liberty: Studies of Mill's 'On Liberty', ed. P. Radcliff (Belmont, CA, 1966), pp. 27-8. Commentators who focus on this aspect of Mill's argument about freedom of thought and discussion include B. Wishy, 'Introduction', in Mill, Prefaces to Liberty, ed. B. Wishy (New York, 1959); H.J. McCloskey, 'Liberty of Expression: Its Grounds and Limits (I)', Inquiry, 13 (1970); D.H. Munro, 'Liberty of Expression: Its Grounds and Limits (II)', Inquiry, 13 (1970); T. Scanlon, 'A Theory of Freedom of Expression', Philosophy and Public Affairs, 1 (1972); R. Wollheim, 'Introduction', in Mill, Three Essays: On Liberty, Representative Government, The Subjection of Women (Oxford, 1976); F. Schauer, Free Speech: A Philosophical Enquiry (Cambridge, 1982), pp. 21-5; J. Cohen, 'Freedom of Expression', Philosophy and Public Affairs, 22 (1993), p. 229; C. Sunstein, Democracy and the Problem of Free Speech (New York, 1993), pp. 186, 272 n. 33; J. Gordon, 'John Stuart Mill and the "Marketplace of Ideas"', Social Theory and Practice, 23 (1997); R. Ladenson, 'Is the Right of Free Speech Special?', Social Theory and Practice, 23 (1997).
18. 7 This civil libertarian aspect of Mill's argument has provoked criticism among conservative scholars such as Kendall ('The "Open Society" and its Fallacies'). It has also stimulated continuing debate among more sympathetic commentators regarding the proper way to interpret Mill's argument. Cf. McCloskey, 'Liberty of Expression: Its Grounds and Limits (I)'; Munro, 'Liberty of Expression: Its Grounds and Limits (II)'; Schauer, Free Speech; and Gordon, 'John Stuart Mill and the "Marketplace of Ideas"'.
19. 7 This civil libertarian aspect of Mill's argument has provoked criticism among conservative scholars such as Kendall ('The "Open Society" and its Fallacies'). It has also stimulated continuing debate among more sympathetic commentators regarding the proper way to interpret Mill's argument. Cf. McCloskey, 'Liberty of Expression: Its Grounds and Limits (I)'; Munro, 'Liberty of Expression: Its Grounds and Limits (II)'; Schauer, Free Speech; and Gordon, 'John Stuart Mill and the "Marketplace of Ideas"'.
20. 7 This civil libertarian aspect of Mill's argument has provoked criticism among conservative scholars such as Kendall ('The "Open Society" and its Fallacies'). It has also stimulated continuing debate among more sympathetic commentators regarding the proper way to interpret Mill's argument. Cf. McCloskey, 'Liberty of Expression: Its Grounds and Limits (I)'; Munro, 'Liberty of Expression: Its Grounds and Limits (II)'; Schauer, Free Speech; and Gordon, 'John Stuart Mill and the "Marketplace of Ideas"'.
21. 7 This civil libertarian aspect of Mill's argument has provoked criticism among conservative scholars such as Kendall ('The "Open Society" and its Fallacies'). It has also stimulated continuing debate among more sympathetic commentators regarding the proper way to interpret Mill's argument. Cf. McCloskey, 'Liberty of Expression: Its Grounds and Limits (I)'; Munro, 'Liberty of Expression: Its Grounds and Limits (II)'; Schauer, Free Speech; and Gordon, 'John Stuart Mill and the "Marketplace of Ideas"'.
22. 8 In the United States, this understanding of freedom of speech and discussion finds expression in the First Amendment jurisprudence of Supreme Court Justices Oliver Wendell Holmes and Louis Brandeis and the First Amendment 'absolutism' advocated by philosopher Alexander Meiklejohn. For Holmes and Brandeis, see e.g., Abrams v. United States, 250 U.S. 616 (1919) (Holmes, J., dissenting); Gitlow v. New York, 268 U.S. 652, 672 (1925) (Holmes, J., dissenting); Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927) (Brandeis, J., dissenting). Moreover, Justice William Brennan explicitly cites Mill in his decision for the US Supreme Court in New York Times v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964). For relevant discussions of the ideas of Holmes, Brandeis and Meiklejohn. see J. Rawls, Political Liberalism (New York, 1993), pp. 351-6; Sunstein, Democracy and the Problem of Free Speech, Ch. 2; and Ladenson, 'Is the Right of Free Speech Special?'.
23. 8 In the United States, this understanding of freedom of speech and discussion finds expression in the First Amendment jurisprudence of Supreme Court Justices Oliver Wendell Holmes and Louis Brandeis and the First Amendment 'absolutism' advocated by philosopher Alexander Meiklejohn. For Holmes and Brandeis, see e.g., Abrams v. United States, 250 U.S. 616 (1919) (Holmes, J., dissenting); Gitlow v. New York, 268 U.S. 652, 672 (1925) (Holmes, J., dissenting); Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927) (Brandeis, J., dissenting). Moreover, Justice William Brennan explicitly cites Mill in his decision for the US Supreme Court in New York Times v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964). For relevant discussions of the ideas of Holmes, Brandeis and Meiklejohn. see J. Rawls, Political Liberalism (New York, 1993), pp. 351-6; Sunstein, Democracy and the Problem of Free Speech, Ch. 2; and Ladenson, 'Is the Right of Free Speech Special?'.
24. 8 In the United States, this understanding of freedom of speech and discussion finds expression in the First Amendment jurisprudence of Supreme Court Justices Oliver Wendell Holmes and Louis Brandeis and the First Amendment 'absolutism' advocated by philosopher Alexander Meiklejohn. For Holmes and Brandeis, see e.g., Abrams v. United States, 250 U.S. 616 (1919) (Holmes, J., dissenting); Gitlow v. New York, 268 U.S. 652, 672 (1925) (Holmes, J., dissenting); Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927) (Brandeis, J., dissenting). Moreover, Justice William Brennan explicitly cites Mill in his decision for the US Supreme Court in New York Times v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964). For relevant discussions of the ideas of Holmes, Brandeis and Meiklejohn. see J. Rawls, Political Liberalism (New York, 1993), pp. 351-6; Sunstein, Democracy and the Problem of Free Speech, Ch. 2; and Ladenson, 'Is the Right of Free Speech Special?'.
25. 8 In the United States, this understanding of freedom of speech and discussion finds expression in the First Amendment jurisprudence of Supreme Court Justices Oliver Wendell Holmes and Louis Brandeis and the First Amendment 'absolutism' advocated by philosopher Alexander Meiklejohn. For Holmes and Brandeis, see e.g., Abrams v. United States, 250 U.S. 616 (1919) (Holmes, J., dissenting); Gitlow v. New York, 268 U.S. 652, 672 (1925) (Holmes, J., dissenting); Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927) (Brandeis, J., dissenting). Moreover, Justice William Brennan explicitly cites Mill in his decision for the US Supreme Court in New York Times v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964). For relevant discussions of the ideas of Holmes, Brandeis and Meiklejohn. see J. Rawls, Political Liberalism (New York, 1993), pp. 351-6; Sunstein, Democracy and the Problem of Free Speech, Ch. 2; and Ladenson, 'Is the Right of Free Speech Special?'.
26. 8 In the United States, this understanding of freedom of speech and discussion finds expression in the First Amendment jurisprudence of Supreme Court Justices Oliver Wendell Holmes and Louis Brandeis and the First Amendment 'absolutism' advocated by philosopher Alexander Meiklejohn. For Holmes and Brandeis, see e.g., Abrams v. United States, 250 U.S. 616 (1919) (Holmes, J., dissenting); Gitlow v. New York, 268 U.S. 652, 672 (1925) (Holmes, J., dissenting); Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927) (Brandeis, J., dissenting). Moreover, Justice William Brennan explicitly cites Mill in his decision for the US Supreme Court in New York Times v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964). For relevant discussions of the ideas of Holmes, Brandeis and Meiklejohn. see J. Rawls, Political Liberalism (New York, 1993), pp. 351-6; Sunstein, Democracy and the Problem of Free Speech, Ch. 2; and Ladenson, 'Is the Right of Free Speech Special?'.
27. 8 In the United States, this understanding of freedom of speech and discussion finds expression in the First Amendment jurisprudence of Supreme Court Justices Oliver Wendell Holmes and Louis Brandeis and the First Amendment 'absolutism' advocated by philosopher Alexander Meiklejohn. For Holmes and Brandeis, see e.g., Abrams v. United States, 250 U.S. 616 (1919) (Holmes, J., dissenting); Gitlow v. New York, 268 U.S. 652, 672 (1925) (Holmes, J., dissenting); Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927) (Brandeis, J., dissenting). Moreover, Justice William Brennan explicitly cites Mill in his decision for the US Supreme Court in New York Times v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964). For relevant discussions of the ideas of Holmes, Brandeis and Meiklejohn. see J. Rawls, Political Liberalism (New York, 1993), pp. 351-6; Sunstein, Democracy and the Problem of Free Speech, Ch. 2; and Ladenson, 'Is the Right of Free Speech Special?'.
28. 8 In the United States, this understanding of freedom of speech and discussion finds expression in the First Amendment jurisprudence of Supreme Court Justices Oliver Wendell Holmes and Louis Brandeis and the First Amendment 'absolutism' advocated by philosopher Alexander Meiklejohn. For Holmes and Brandeis, see e.g., Abrams v. United States, 250 U.S. 616 (1919) (Holmes, J., dissenting); Gitlow v. New York, 268 U.S. 652, 672 (1925) (Holmes, J., dissenting); Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927) (Brandeis, J., dissenting). Moreover, Justice William Brennan explicitly cites Mill in his decision for the US Supreme Court in New York Times v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964). For relevant discussions of the ideas of Holmes, Brandeis and Meiklejohn. see J. Rawls, Political Liberalism (New York, 1993), pp. 351-6; Sunstein, Democracy and the Problem of Free Speech, Ch. 2; and Ladenson, 'Is the Right of Free Speech Special?'.
29. 9 See Habermas, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere; N. Garnham, The Media and the Public Sphere', in Habermas and the Public Sphere, ed. C. Calhoun (Cambridge, MA, 1992); J. Keane, 'Democracy and the Media - Without Foundations', in Prospects for Democracy: North, South, East, West, ed. D. Held (Stanford, 1993); R. McChesney, Corporate Media and the Threat to Democracy (New York, 1997); and A. Ryan, 'Exaggerated Hopes and Baseless Fears', Social Research, 64 (1997).
30. 9 See Habermas, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere; N. Garnham, The Media and the Public Sphere', in Habermas and the Public Sphere, ed. C. Calhoun (Cambridge, MA, 1992); J. Keane, 'Democracy and the Media - Without Foundations', in Prospects for Democracy: North, South, East, West, ed. D. Held (Stanford, 1993); R. McChesney, Corporate Media and the Threat to Democracy (New York, 1997); and A. Ryan, 'Exaggerated Hopes and Baseless Fears', Social Research, 64 (1997).
31. 9 See Habermas, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere; N. Garnham, The Media and the Public Sphere', in Habermas and the Public Sphere, ed. C. Calhoun (Cambridge, MA, 1992); J. Keane, 'Democracy and the Media - Without Foundations', in Prospects for Democracy: North, South, East, West, ed. D. Held (Stanford, 1993); R. McChesney, Corporate Media and the Threat to Democracy (New York, 1997); and A. Ryan, 'Exaggerated Hopes and Baseless Fears', Social Research, 64 (1997).
32. 9 See Habermas, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere; N. Garnham, The Media and the Public Sphere', in Habermas and the Public Sphere, ed. C. Calhoun (Cambridge, MA, 1992); J. Keane, 'Democracy and the Media - Without Foundations', in Prospects for Democracy: North, South, East, West, ed. D. Held (Stanford, 1993); R. McChesney, Corporate Media and the Threat to Democracy (New York, 1997); and A. Ryan, 'Exaggerated Hopes and Baseless Fears', Social Research, 64 (1997).
33. 9 See Habermas, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere; N. Garnham, The Media and the Public Sphere', in Habermas and the Public Sphere, ed. C. Calhoun (Cambridge, MA, 1992); J. Keane, 'Democracy and the Media - Without Foundations', in Prospects for Democracy: North, South, East, West, ed. D. Held (Stanford, 1993); R. McChesney, Corporate Media and the Threat to Democracy (New York, 1997); and A. Ryan, 'Exaggerated Hopes and Baseless Fears', Social Research, 64 (1997).
34. 10 CRG, p. 411.
35. 11 See B. Baum, Rereading Power and Freedom in J.S. Mill (Toronto, 2000), Ch. 8.
36. 12 CRG, p. 432.
37. 13 CRG, p. 433.
38. 14 CRG, p. 402.
39. 15 CRG, p. 436.
40. 16 Ibid.
41. 17 Mill, 'Armand Carrel', in J.S. Mill, Dissertations and Discussion, Vol.1 (New York, 1973), p. 234; 'Civilization' (1836), in Dissertations and Discussion, Vol. 1, p. 173; and CRG, p. 380. I discuss Mill's view of social power more fully in Baum, Rereading Power and Freedom in J.S. Mill, Ch. 3.
42. 17 Mill, 'Armand Carrel', in J.S. Mill, Dissertations and Discussion, Vol.1 (New York, 1973), p. 234; 'Civilization' (1836), in Dissertations and Discussion, Vol. 1, p. 173; and CRG, p. 380. I discuss Mill's view of social power more fully in Baum, Rereading Power and Freedom in J.S. Mill, Ch. 3.
43. 17 Mill, 'Armand Carrel', in J.S. Mill, Dissertations and Discussion, Vol.1 (New York, 1973), p. 234; 'Civilization' (1836), in Dissertations and Discussion, Vol. 1, p. 173; and CRG, p. 380. I discuss Mill's view of social power more fully in Baum, Rereading Power and Freedom in J.S. Mill, Ch. 3.
44. 17 Mill, 'Armand Carrel', in J.S. Mill, Dissertations and Discussion, Vol.1 (New York, 1973), p. 234; 'Civilization' (1836), in Dissertations and Discussion, Vol. 1, p. 173; and CRG, p. 380. I discuss Mill's view of social power more fully in Baum, Rereading Power and Freedom in J.S. Mill, Ch. 3.
45. 18 CRG, pp. 380-1.
46. 19 CRG, p. 381.
47. 20 In an earlier essay Mill outlines his view of the sources of social power as follows: 'There are in society a number of distinct forces - of separate and independent sources of power. There is the general power of knowledge and cultivated intelligence. There is the power of religion; by which, speaking politically, is to be understood that of religious teachers. There is the power of military skill and discipline. There is the power of wealth; the power of numbers and physical forces; and several others might be added.' (Mill, 'Guizot's Essays and Lectures on History', Dissertations and Discussion, Vol. 2 (New York, 1973), p. 236).
48. 21 J.S. Mill, Utilitarianism, CW, Vol. 10, pp. 210-14; OL, p. 224.
49. 21 J.S. Mill, Utilitarianism, CW, Vol. 10, pp. 210-14; OL, p. 224.
50. 22 D. Thompson, John Stuart Mill and Representative Government (Princeton, 1976), Ch. 4; G.L. Williams, 'Introduction', in John Stuart Mill on Politics and Society, ed. G.L. Williams (Glasgow, 1976), pp. 35-6; and Baum, Rereading Power and Freedom in J.S. Mill, Ch. 2.
51. 22 D. Thompson, John Stuart Mill and Representative Government (Princeton, 1976), Ch. 4; G.L. Williams, 'Introduction', in John Stuart Mill on Politics and Society, ed. G.L. Williams (Glasgow, 1976), pp. 35-6; and Baum, Rereading Power and Freedom in J.S. Mill, Ch. 2.
52. 22 D. Thompson, John Stuart Mill and Representative Government (Princeton, 1976), Ch. 4; G.L. Williams, 'Introduction', in John Stuart Mill on Politics and Society, ed. G.L. Williams (Glasgow, 1976), pp. 35-6; and Baum, Rereading Power and Freedom in J.S. Mill, Ch. 2.
53. 23 See M. Cowling, 'The Illiberalism of John Stuart Mill', in John Stuart Mill, On Liberty, ed. D. Spitz (New York, 1975); and C.L. Ten, 'Mill and Liberty', Journal of the History of Ideas, 30 (1969).
54. 23 See M. Cowling, 'The Illiberalism of John Stuart Mill', in John Stuart Mill, On Liberty, ed. D. Spitz (New York, 1975); and C.L. Ten, 'Mill and Liberty', Journal of the History of Ideas, 30 (1969).
55. 24 OL, p. 224.
56. 25 J.S. Mill, The Subjection of Women, CW, Vol. 21 (hereafter SW), p. 236. Mill's view of 'utility in the largest sense' builds upon his view of the 'higher faculties' that make people capable of 'more elevated' forms of gratification and 'more acute suffering' than are other animals (Mill, Utilitarianism, p. 211).
57. 25 J.S. Mill, The Subjection of Women, CW, Vol. 21 (hereafter SW), p. 236. Mill's view of 'utility in the largest sense' builds upon his view of the 'higher faculties' that make people capable of 'more elevated' forms of gratification and 'more acute suffering' than are other animals (Mill, Utilitarianism, p. 211).
58. 26 OL, Ch. 3. For further discussion of this point, see J. Gray, 'Indirect Liberty and Fundamental Rights', in J. Gray, Liberalisms: Essays in Political Philosophy (London, 1989); J. Skorupski, John Stuart Mill (London, 1989); and Baum, Rereading Power and Freedom in J.S. Mill, Chs. 2 and 5. Gray notes some lingering tensions between Mill's utilitarianism and his defence of the primacy of freedom.
59. 26 OL, Ch. 3. For further discussion of this point, see J. Gray, 'Indirect Liberty and Fundamental Rights', in J. Gray, Liberalisms: Essays in Political Philosophy (London, 1989); J. Skorupski, John Stuart Mill (London, 1989); and Baum, Rereading Power and Freedom in J.S. Mill, Chs. 2 and 5. Gray notes some lingering tensions between Mill's utilitarianism and his defence of the primacy of freedom.
60. 26 OL, Ch. 3. For further discussion of this point, see J. Gray, 'Indirect Liberty and Fundamental Rights', in J. Gray, Liberalisms: Essays in Political Philosophy (London, 1989); J. Skorupski, John Stuart Mill (London, 1989); and Baum, Rereading Power and Freedom in J.S. Mill, Chs. 2 and 5. Gray notes some lingering tensions between Mill's utilitarianism and his defence of the primacy of freedom.
61. 26 OL, Ch. 3. For further discussion of this point, see J. Gray, 'Indirect Liberty and Fundamental Rights', in J. Gray, Liberalisms: Essays in Political Philosophy (London, 1989); J. Skorupski, John Stuart Mill (London, 1989); and Baum, Rereading Power and Freedom in J.S. Mill, Chs. 2 and 5. Gray notes some lingering tensions between Mill's utilitarianism and his defence of the primacy of freedom.
62. 27 SW, p. 336. I develop this point more fully in Baum, Rereading Power and Freedom in J.S. Mill, Chs. 1 and 6-8.
63. 27 SW, p. 336. I develop this point more fully in Baum, Rereading Power and Freedom in J.S. Mill, Chs. 1 and 6-8.
64. 28 Mill, 'Recent Writings on Reform', CW, Vol. 19, pp. 354-5. See also J.S. Mill, 'Centralization' (1862), CW, Vol. 19, p. 589.
65. 28 Mill, 'Recent Writings on Reform', CW, Vol. 19, pp. 354-5. See also J.S. Mill, 'Centralization' (1862), CW, Vol. 19, p. 589.
66. 29 CRG, p. 432.
67. 30 CRG, Ch. 2. See Thompson, John Stuart Mill and Representative Government; and Baum, Rereading Power and Freedom in J.S. Mill, Ch. 8.
68. 30 CRG, Ch. 2. See Thompson, John Stuart Mill and Representative Government; and Baum, Rereading Power and Freedom in J.S. Mill, Ch. 8.
69. 30 CRG, Ch. 2. See Thompson, John Stuart Mill and Representative Government; and Baum, Rereading Power and Freedom in J.S. Mill, Ch. 8.
70. 31 Wollheim, 'Introduction', Three Essays, pp. xx-xxi.
71. Ibid., pp. xviii-xx; Thompson, John Stuart Mill and Representative Government, pp. 121-3; and Baum, Rereading Power and Freedom in J.S. Mill, Ch. 8.
72. Ibid., pp. xviii-xx; Thompson, John Stuart Mill and Representative Government, pp. 121-3; and Baum, Rereading Power and Freedom in J.S. Mill, Ch. 8.
73. Ibid., pp. xviii-xx; Thompson, John Stuart Mill and Representative Government, pp. 121-3; and Baum, Rereading Power and Freedom in J.S. Mill, Ch. 8.
74. 33 CRG, p. 432.
75. 34 Ibid.
76. 35 Ibid.
77. 36 CRG, pp. 432-3.
78. 37 CRG, p. 433.
79. 38 Ibid.
80. 39 CRG, p. 448. He contrasts this idea to the 'winner-take-air electoral system that is used in the United States to elect members of Congress. In the latter system, representatives are determined by elections in single-member districts. Whoever wins a majority (or sometimes just a plurality) of the votes is elected to represent the district. Mill calls this system a 'false democracy' because it gives only the majority (or plurality) of voters in each electoral district a voice in government (CRG, pp. 448-9).
81. 39 CRG, p. 448. He contrasts this idea to the 'winner-take-air electoral system that is used in the United States to elect members of Congress. In the latter system, representatives are determined by elections in single-member districts. Whoever wins a majority (or sometimes just a plurality) of the votes is elected to represent the district. Mill calls this system a 'false democracy' because it gives only the majority (or plurality) of voters in each electoral district a voice in government (CRG, pp. 448-9).
82. 40 CRG, pp. 449, 453-5.
83. 41 CRG, 449. He explains further in 'Recent Writers on Reform' that representation of minorities is necessary to establish a 'deliberative assembly' that is based on 'the real, instead of nominal representation of every individual elector' (Mill, 'Recent Writers on Reform', CW, Vol. 19, p. 358). During his tenure in Parliament Mill applied his view of equal representation in a speech in favour of Gladstone's Representation of the People Bill: the Reform Bill of 1860, which sought to broaden suffrage. Mill insisted that 'sufficient representation' of the working classes was necessary to ensure that their opinions are fairly placed before the House [of Commons], and are met with real arguments, addressed to their own reason, by people who can enter into their way of looking at the subjects in which they are concerned'. See Mill, 'Representation of the People', 13 April 1866, CW, Vol. 28, p. 65, quoted in J. Carlisle, 'Mr. J. Stuart Mill, M.P., and the Character of the Working Classes', in Mill and the Moral Character of Liberalism, ed. E. Eisenach (University Park, PA, 1998), p. 157.
84. 41 CRG, 449. He explains further in 'Recent Writers on Reform' that representation of minorities is necessary to establish a 'deliberative assembly' that is based on 'the real, instead of nominal representation of every individual elector' (Mill, 'Recent Writers on Reform', CW, Vol. 19, p. 358). During his tenure in Parliament Mill applied his view of equal representation in a speech in favour of Gladstone's Representation of the People Bill: the Reform Bill of 1860, which sought to broaden suffrage. Mill insisted that 'sufficient representation' of the working classes was necessary to ensure that their opinions are fairly placed before the House [of Commons], and are met with real arguments, addressed to their own reason, by people who can enter into their way of looking at the subjects in which they are concerned'. See Mill, 'Representation of the People', 13 April 1866, CW, Vol. 28, p. 65, quoted in J. Carlisle, 'Mr. J. Stuart Mill, M.P., and the Character of the Working Classes', in Mill and the Moral Character of Liberalism, ed. E. Eisenach (University Park, PA, 1998), p. 157.
85. 41 CRG, 449. He explains further in 'Recent Writers on Reform' that representation of minorities is necessary to establish a 'deliberative assembly' that is based on 'the real, instead of nominal representation of every individual elector' (Mill, 'Recent Writers on Reform', CW, Vol. 19, p. 358). During his tenure in Parliament Mill applied his view of equal representation in a speech in favour of Gladstone's Representation of the People Bill: the Reform Bill of 1860, which sought to broaden suffrage. Mill insisted that 'sufficient representation' of the working classes was necessary to ensure that their opinions are fairly placed before the House [of Commons], and are met with real arguments, addressed to their own reason, by people who can enter into their way of looking at the subjects in which they are concerned'. See Mill, 'Representation of the People', 13 April 1866, CW, Vol. 28, p. 65, quoted in J. Carlisle, 'Mr. J. Stuart Mill, M.P., and the Character of the Working Classes', in Mill and the Moral Character of Liberalism, ed. E. Eisenach (University Park, PA, 1998), p. 157.
86. 41 CRG, 449. He explains further in 'Recent Writers on Reform' that representation of minorities is necessary to establish a 'deliberative assembly' that is based on 'the real, instead of nominal representation of every individual elector' (Mill, 'Recent Writers on Reform', CW, Vol. 19, p. 358). During his tenure in Parliament Mill applied his view of equal representation in a speech in favour of Gladstone's Representation of the People Bill: the Reform Bill of 1860, which sought to broaden suffrage. Mill insisted that 'sufficient representation' of the working classes was necessary to ensure that their opinions are fairly placed before the House [of Commons], and are met with real arguments, addressed to their own reason, by people who can enter into their way of looking at the subjects in which they are concerned'. See Mill, 'Representation of the People', 13 April 1866, CW, Vol. 28, p. 65, quoted in J. Carlisle, 'Mr. J. Stuart Mill, M.P., and the Character of the Working Classes', in Mill and the Moral Character of Liberalism, ed. E. Eisenach (University Park, PA, 1998), p. 157.
87. 42 OL, p. 252. Mill's broader argument for freedom of thought and discussion has been widely discussed (see, for example, the works cited in note 6, above). Therefore, I will highlight those aspects of his argument that are most germane to my present argument.
88. 43 OL, p. 252.
89. 44 OL, p. 253.
90. 45 OL, pp. 253-4.
91. 46 OL, p. 254. I am indebted to Jill Gordon for bringing to light the significance of this aspect of Mill's argument. See Gordon, 'John Stuart Mill and the "Marketplace of Ideas"'.
92. 46 OL, p. 254. I am indebted to Jill Gordon for bringing to light the significance of this aspect of Mill's argument. See Gordon, 'John Stuart Mill and the "Marketplace of Ideas"'.
93. 47 See Mill, Principles of Political Economy, CW, Vol. 2, Book II, Ch. 1; Mill, Chapters on Socialism, CW, Vol. 5; and Mill, 'Newman's Political Economy', CW, Vol. 5. See also J. Riley, 'J.S. Mill's Liberal Utilitarian Assessment of Capitalism Versus Socialism', Utilitas, 8 (March 1996); B. Baum, 'J.S. Mill's Conception of Economic Freedom', History of Political Thought, XX (1999), pp. 494-530.
94. 47 See Mill, Principles of Political Economy, CW, Vol. 2, Book II, Ch. 1; Mill, Chapters on Socialism, CW, Vol. 5; and Mill, 'Newman's Political Economy', CW, Vol. 5. See also J. Riley, 'J.S. Mill's Liberal Utilitarian Assessment of Capitalism Versus Socialism', Utilitas, 8 (March 1996); B. Baum, 'J.S. Mill's Conception of Economic Freedom', History of Political Thought, XX (1999), pp. 494-530.
95. 47 See Mill, Principles of Political Economy, CW, Vol. 2, Book II, Ch. 1; Mill, Chapters on Socialism, CW, Vol. 5; and Mill, 'Newman's Political Economy', CW, Vol. 5. See also J. Riley, 'J.S. Mill's Liberal Utilitarian Assessment of Capitalism Versus Socialism', Utilitas, 8 (March 1996); B. Baum, 'J.S. Mill's Conception of Economic Freedom', History of Political Thought, XX (1999), pp. 494-530.
96. 47 See Mill, Principles of Political Economy, CW, Vol. 2, Book II, Ch. 1; Mill, Chapters on Socialism, CW, Vol. 5; and Mill, 'Newman's Political Economy', CW, Vol. 5. See also J. Riley, 'J.S. Mill's Liberal Utilitarian Assessment of Capitalism Versus Socialism', Utilitas, 8 (March 1996); B. Baum, 'J.S. Mill's Conception of Economic Freedom', History of Political Thought, XX (1999), pp. 494-530.
97. 47 See Mill, Principles of Political Economy, CW, Vol. 2, Book II, Ch. 1; Mill, Chapters on Socialism, CW, Vol. 5; and Mill, 'Newman's Political Economy', CW, Vol. 5. See also J. Riley, 'J.S. Mill's Liberal Utilitarian Assessment of Capitalism Versus Socialism', Utilitas, 8 (March 1996); B. Baum, 'J.S. Mill's Conception of Economic Freedom', History of Political Thought, XX (1999), pp. 494-530.
98. 48 Mill, 'The Negro Question', CW, Vol. 21; SW.
99. 48 Mill, 'The Negro Question', CW, Vol. 21; SW.
100. 49 CRG, p. 432.
101. 50 CRG, p. 381.
102. 51 Ibid.
103. 52 Mill, Utilitarianism, p. 218; OL, p. 282.
104. 52 Mill, Utilitarianism, p. 218; OL, p. 282.
105. 53 Mill, The Utility of Religion', CW, Vol. 10, p. 409.
106. 54 OL, p. 282.
107. 55 He says that education in the broadest sense 'comprehends even the indirect effects produced on the character and on the human faculties, by thing of which the direct purposes are quite different; by laws, by the forms of government, by the industrial arts, by modes of social life'. See Mill, 'Inaugural Address Delivered to the University of St. Andrews', CW, Vol. 21, p. 217.
108. 56 OL, p. 282; Mill, 'The Utility of Religion', pp. 408-9.
109. 56 OL, p. 282; Mill, 'The Utility of Religion', pp. 408-9.
110. 57 Mill, Chapters on Socialism, p. 746; Mill, Utilitarianism, pp. 215-16; OL, p. 299.
111. 57 Mill, Chapters on Socialism, p. 746; Mill, Utilitarianism, pp. 215-16; OL, p. 299.
112. 57 Mill, Chapters on Socialism, p. 746; Mill, Utilitarianism, pp. 215-16; OL, p. 299.
113. 58 Mill, 'On Genius', CW, Vol. 1; Mill, 'Dr. Whewell on Moral Philosophy', Dissertations and Discussions, Vol. 2; and Mill, 'Inaugural Address Delivered to the University of St.Andrews'. I discuss Mill's view of the kind of education that fosters free agency in Baum, Rereading Power and Freedom in J.S. Mill, Ch. 4.
114. 58 Mill, 'On Genius', CW, Vol. 1; Mill, 'Dr. Whewell on Moral Philosophy', Dissertations and Discussions, Vol. 2; and Mill, 'Inaugural Address Delivered to the University of St.Andrews'. I discuss Mill's view of the kind of education that fosters free agency in Baum, Rereading Power and Freedom in J.S. Mill, Ch. 4.
115. 58 Mill, 'On Genius', CW, Vol. 1; Mill, 'Dr. Whewell on Moral Philosophy', Dissertations and Discussions, Vol. 2; and Mill, 'Inaugural Address Delivered to the University of St.Andrews'. I discuss Mill's view of the kind of education that fosters free agency in Baum, Rereading Power and Freedom in J.S. Mill, Ch. 4.
116. 58 Mill, 'On Genius', CW, Vol. 1; Mill, 'Dr. Whewell on Moral Philosophy', Dissertations and Discussions, Vol. 2; and Mill, 'Inaugural Address Delivered to the University of St.Andrews'. I discuss Mill's view of the kind of education that fosters free agency in Baum, Rereading Power and Freedom in J.S. Mill, Ch. 4.
117. 59 CRG, p. 410. Mill elaborates this point strikingly in Principles of Political Economy. He challenges the prevailing theory that the work lives of labourers 'should be regulated for them, not by them' (Principles of Political Economy, p. 759, Mill's emphasis). According to this theory, working people 'should not be required or encouraged to think for themselves, or give to their own reflection or forecast an influential voice in the determination of their destiny' (ibid.). Similarly, in The Subjection of Women he explains how patriarchal gender and family relationships undermine the development of free agency among women. 'All women', he says, 'are brought up from the very earliest years in the belief that their ideal of character is ... not self-will, and government by self-control, but submission, and yielding to the control of others' (SW, p. 271).
118. 59 CRG, p. 410. Mill elaborates this point strikingly in Principles of Political Economy. He challenges the prevailing theory that the work lives of labourers 'should be regulated for them, not by them' (Principles of Political Economy, p. 759, Mill's emphasis). According to this theory, working people 'should not be required or encouraged to think for themselves, or give to their own reflection or forecast an influential voice in the determination of their destiny' (ibid.). Similarly, in The Subjection of Women he explains how patriarchal gender and family relationships undermine the development of free agency among women. 'All women', he says, 'are brought up from the very earliest years in the belief that their ideal of character is ... not self-will, and government by self-control, but submission, and yielding to the control of others' (SW, p. 271).
119. 59 CRG, p. 410. Mill elaborates this point strikingly in Principles of Political Economy. He challenges the prevailing theory that the work lives of labourers 'should be regulated for them, not by them' (Principles of Political Economy, p. 759, Mill's emphasis). According to this theory, working people 'should not be required or encouraged to think for themselves, or give to their own reflection or forecast an influential voice in the determination of their destiny' (ibid.). Similarly, in The Subjection of Women he explains how patriarchal gender and family relationships undermine the development of free agency among women. 'All women', he says, 'are brought up from the very earliest years in the belief that their ideal of character is ... not self-will, and government by self-control, but submission, and yielding to the control of others' (SW, p. 271).
120. 59 CRG, p. 410. Mill elaborates this point strikingly in Principles of Political Economy. He challenges the prevailing theory that the work lives of labourers 'should be regulated for them, not by them' (Principles of Political Economy, p. 759, Mill's emphasis). According to this theory, working people 'should not be required or encouraged to think for themselves, or give to their own reflection or forecast an influential voice in the determination of their destiny' (ibid.). Similarly, in The Subjection of Women he explains how patriarchal gender and family relationships undermine the development of free agency among women. 'All women', he says, 'are brought up from the very earliest years in the belief that their ideal of character is ... not self-will, and government by self-control, but submission, and yielding to the control of others' (SW, p. 271).
121. 60 OL, pp. 282, 302.
122. 61 CRG, p. 381, emphasis added.
123. 62 Ibid.
124. 63 C.L. Ten, 'Democracy, Socialism, and the Working Classes', in Cambridge Companion to John Stuart Mill, ed. J. Skorupski (Cambridge, 1998), p. 381.
125. 64 Mill, 'De Tocqueville on Democracy in America [I]', CW, Vol. 18, p. 73; Mill, Principles of Political Economy, p. 765; 'Thoughts on Parliamentary Reform', CW, Vol. 19, pp 323 ff.; CRG, Chs. 5-8. What is necessary, Mill says, ' is not that public should not be what it is and must be, the ruling power; but that, in order to [foster] the formation of the best opinion, there should exist somewhere a great social support for opinions and sentiments different from those of the mass' (Mill, 'De Tocqueville on Democracy in America [II]', CW, Vol. 18 (hereafter 'TDA [II]'), p. 198).
126. 64 Mill, 'De Tocqueville on Democracy in America [I]', CW, Vol. 18, p. 73; Mill, Principles of Political Economy, p. 765; 'Thoughts on Parliamentary Reform', CW, Vol. 19, pp 323 ff.; CRG, Chs. 5-8. What is necessary, Mill says, ' is not that public should not be what it is and must be, the ruling power; but that, in order to [foster] the formation of the best opinion, there should exist somewhere a great social support for opinions and sentiments different from those of the mass' (Mill, 'De Tocqueville on Democracy in America [II]', CW, Vol. 18 (hereafter 'TDA [II]'), p. 198).
127. 64 Mill, 'De Tocqueville on Democracy in America [I]', CW, Vol. 18, p. 73; Mill, Principles of Political Economy, p. 765; 'Thoughts on Parliamentary Reform', CW, Vol. 19, pp 323 ff.; CRG, Chs. 5-8. What is necessary, Mill says, ' is not that public should not be what it is and must be, the ruling power; but that, in order to [foster] the formation of the best opinion, there should exist somewhere a great social support for opinions and sentiments different from those of the mass' (Mill, 'De Tocqueville on Democracy in America [II]', CW, Vol. 18 (hereafter 'TDA [II]'), p. 198).
128. 64 Mill, 'De Tocqueville on Democracy in America [I]', CW, Vol. 18, p. 73; Mill, Principles of Political Economy, p. 765; 'Thoughts on Parliamentary Reform', CW, Vol. 19, pp 323 ff.; CRG, Chs. 5-8. What is necessary, Mill says, ' is not that public should not be what it is and must be, the ruling power; but that, in order to [foster] the formation of the best opinion, there should exist somewhere a great social support for opinions and sentiments different from those of the mass' (Mill, 'De Tocqueville on Democracy in America [II]', CW, Vol. 18 (hereafter 'TDA [II]'), p. 198).
129. 64 Mill, 'De Tocqueville on Democracy in America [I]', CW, Vol. 18, p. 73; Mill, Principles of Political Economy, p. 765; 'Thoughts on Parliamentary Reform', CW, Vol. 19, pp 323 ff.; CRG, Chs. 5-8. What is necessary, Mill says, ' is not that public should not be what it is and must be, the ruling power; but that, in order to [foster] the formation of the best opinion, there should exist somewhere a great social support for opinions and sentiments different from those of the mass' (Mill, 'De Tocqueville on Democracy in America [II]', CW, Vol. 18 (hereafter 'TDA [II]'), p. 198).
130. 65 CRG, p. 382. In an 1829 letter to Gustave D'Eichthal, Mill refers to the 'instructed' as a potential 'pouvoir spirituel' (spiritual power) in society. His idea is that 'the body of the poeple, i.e., the uninstructed, shall entertain the same feelings of deference & submission to the authority of the instructed, in morals and politics, as they at present do in the physical sciences'. Mill sees this situation developing in tandem with 'the diffusion of knowledge amoong the labouring classes & the consequent improvement of their intellects', and in the coalescing of these social forces he sees great hope for 'regenerating' society by shaping people's opinion: 'It is not sufficiently considered by many zealots for even right opinions, that you have done little or nothing for a man when you have merely given him an opinion. An opinion suggests hardly anything to an uninformed mind; it many become a watchword, but it can never be a moving & influencing and living principle within him.' (Letter to Gustave D'Eichthal, 7 November 1829, CW, Vol. 12, pp. 40, 42.) On Mill's notion of a secular clerisy, see C. Kent, 'Higher Journalism and the Mid-Victorian Clerisy', Victorian Studies, 13 (December 1969), pp. 189-93; C. Kent, Brains and Numbers: Elitism, Comtism, and Democracy in Mid-Victorian England (Toronto, 1978), pp. 127-8; and B. Semmel, 'John Stuart Mill's Coleridgean Neoradicalism', in Mill and the Moral Character of Liberalism, ed. E. Eisenach (University Park, PA, 1998), p. 58.
131. 65 CRG, p. 382. In an 1829 letter to Gustave D'Eichthal, Mill refers to the 'instructed' as a potential 'pouvoir spirituel' (spiritual power) in society. His idea is that 'the body of the poeple, i.e., the uninstructed, shall entertain the same feelings of deference & submission to the authority of the instructed, in morals and politics, as they at present do in the physical sciences'. Mill sees this situation developing in tandem with 'the diffusion of knowledge amoong the labouring classes & the consequent improvement of their intellects', and in the coalescing of these social forces he sees great hope for 'regenerating' society by shaping people's opinion: 'It is not sufficiently considered by many zealots for even right opinions, that you have done little or nothing for a man when you have merely given him an opinion. An opinion suggests hardly anything to an uninformed mind; it many become a watchword, but it can never be a moving & influencing and living principle within him.' (Letter to Gustave D'Eichthal, 7 November 1829, CW, Vol. 12, pp. 40, 42.) On Mill's notion of a secular clerisy, see C. Kent, 'Higher Journalism and the Mid-Victorian Clerisy', Victorian Studies, 13 (December 1969), pp. 189-93; C. Kent, Brains and Numbers: Elitism, Comtism, and Democracy in Mid-Victorian England (Toronto, 1978), pp. 127-8; and B. Semmel, 'John Stuart Mill's Coleridgean Neoradicalism', in Mill and the Moral Character of Liberalism, ed. E. Eisenach (University Park, PA, 1998), p. 58.
132. 65 CRG, p. 382. In an 1829 letter to Gustave D'Eichthal, Mill refers to the 'instructed' as a potential 'pouvoir spirituel' (spiritual power) in society. His idea is that 'the body of the poeple, i.e., the uninstructed, shall entertain the same feelings of deference & submission to the authority of the instructed, in morals and politics, as they at present do in the physical sciences'. Mill sees this situation developing in tandem with 'the diffusion of knowledge amoong the labouring classes & the consequent improvement of their intellects', and in the coalescing of these social forces he sees great hope for 'regenerating' society by shaping people's opinion: 'It is not sufficiently considered by many zealots for even right opinions, that you have done little or nothing for a man when you have merely given him an opinion. An opinion suggests hardly anything to an uninformed mind; it many become a watchword, but it can never be a moving & influencing and living principle within him.' (Letter to Gustave D'Eichthal, 7 November 1829, CW, Vol. 12, pp. 40, 42.) On Mill's notion of a secular clerisy, see C. Kent, 'Higher Journalism and the Mid-Victorian Clerisy', Victorian Studies, 13 (December 1969), pp. 189-93; C. Kent, Brains and Numbers: Elitism, Comtism, and Democracy in Mid-Victorian England (Toronto, 1978), pp. 127-8; and B. Semmel, 'John Stuart Mill's Coleridgean Neoradicalism', in Mill and the Moral Character of Liberalism, ed. E. Eisenach (University Park, PA, 1998), p. 58.
133. 65 CRG, p. 382. In an 1829 letter to Gustave D'Eichthal, Mill refers to the 'instructed' as a potential 'pouvoir spirituel' (spiritual power) in society. His idea is that 'the body of the poeple, i.e., the uninstructed, shall entertain the same feelings of deference & submission to the authority of the instructed, in morals and politics, as they at present do in the physical sciences'. Mill sees this situation developing in tandem with 'the diffusion of knowledge amoong the labouring classes & the consequent improvement of their intellects', and in the coalescing of these social forces he sees great hope for 'regenerating' society by shaping people's opinion: 'It is not sufficiently considered by many zealots for even right opinions, that you have done little or nothing for a man when you have merely given him an opinion. An opinion suggests hardly anything to an uninformed mind; it many become a watchword, but it can never be a moving & influencing and living principle within him.' (Letter to Gustave D'Eichthal, 7 November 1829, CW, Vol. 12, pp. 40, 42.) On Mill's notion of a secular clerisy, see C. Kent, 'Higher Journalism and the Mid-Victorian Clerisy', Victorian Studies, 13 (December 1969), pp. 189-93; C. Kent, Brains and Numbers: Elitism, Comtism, and Democracy in Mid-Victorian England (Toronto, 1978), pp. 127-8; and B. Semmel, 'John Stuart Mill's Coleridgean Neoradicalism', in Mill and the Moral Character of Liberalism, ed. E. Eisenach (University Park, PA, 1998), p. 58.
134. 65 CRG, p. 382. In an 1829 letter to Gustave D'Eichthal, Mill refers to the 'instructed' as a potential 'pouvoir spirituel' (spiritual power) in society. His idea is that 'the body of the poeple, i.e., the uninstructed, shall entertain the same feelings of deference & submission to the authority of the instructed, in morals and politics, as they at present do in the physical sciences'. Mill sees this situation developing in tandem with 'the diffusion of knowledge amoong the labouring classes & the consequent improvement of their intellects', and in the coalescing of these social forces he sees great hope for 'regenerating' society by shaping people's opinion: 'It is not sufficiently considered by many zealots for even right opinions, that you have done little or nothing for a man when you have merely given him an opinion. An opinion suggests hardly anything to an uninformed mind; it many become a watchword, but it can never be a moving & influencing and living principle within him.' (Letter to Gustave D'Eichthal, 7 November 1829, CW, Vol. 12, pp. 40, 42.) On Mill's notion of a secular clerisy, see C. Kent, 'Higher Journalism and the Mid-Victorian Clerisy', Victorian Studies, 13 (December 1969), pp. 189-93; C. Kent, Brains and Numbers: Elitism, Comtism, and Democracy in Mid-Victorian England (Toronto, 1978), pp. 127-8; and B. Semmel, 'John Stuart Mill's Coleridgean Neoradicalism', in Mill and the Moral Character of Liberalism, ed. E. Eisenach (University Park, PA, 1998), p. 58.
135. 66 In On Liberty, for instance, he says that society is 'armed not only with all the powers of education [with which to shape people's conduct], but with the ascendancy which the authority of a received opinion always exercises over the minds who are least fitted to judge for themselves' (OL, p. 282).
136. 67 'TDA [II]', p. 165. He says elsewhere that the prospect of manhood suffrage - with the abolition of property requirements for voting - gives them potentially 'absolute power, if they chose to exercise it' (CRG, p. 467). That is, if they are organized to exercise 'the power of combined action', the working classes could use their superior numerical strength for 'the promotion of their collective objects' through political elections ('TDA[II]', p. 165; Mill, Chapters on Socialism, p. 707). He says in On Liberty, though: 'The majority have not yet learnt to feel the power of the government their power, or its opinions their opinions.' (OL, p. 223.)
137. 67 'TDA [II]', p. 165. He says elsewhere that the prospect of manhood suffrage -with the abolition of property requirements for voting - gives them potentially 'absolute power, if they chose to exercise it' (CRG, p. 467). That is, if they are organized to exercise 'the power of combined action', the working classes could use their superior numerical strength for 'the promotion of their collective objects' through political elections ('TDA[II]', p. 165; Mill, Chapters on Socialism, p. 707). He says in On Liberty, though: 'The majority have not yet learnt to feel the power of the government their power, or its opinions their opinions.' (OL, p. 223.)
138. 67 'TDA [II]', p. 165. He says elsewhere that the prospect of manhood suffrage - with the abolition of property requirements for voting - gives them potentially 'absolute power, if they chose to exercise it' (CRG, p. 467). That is, if they are organized to exercise 'the power of combined action', the working classes could use their superior numerical strength for 'the promotion of their collective objects' through political elections ('TDA[II]', p. 165; Mill, Chapters on Socialism, p. 707). He says in On Liberty, though: 'The majority have not yet learnt to feel the power of the government their power, or its opinions their opinions.' (OL, p. 223.)
139. 67 'TDA [II]', p. 165. He says elsewhere that the prospect of manhood suffrage - with the abolition of property requirements for voting - gives them potentially 'absolute power, if they chose to exercise it' (CRG, p. 467). That is, if they are organized to exercise 'the power of combined action', the working classes could use their superior numerical strength for 'the promotion of their collective objects' through political elections ('TDA[II]', p. 165; Mill, Chapters on Socialism, p. 707). He says in On Liberty, though: 'The majority have not yet learnt to feel the power of the government their power, or its opinions their opinions.' (OL, p. 223.)
140. 67 'TDA [II]', p. 165. He says elsewhere that the prospect of manhood suffrage - with the abolition of property requirements for voting - gives them potentially 'absolute power, if they chose to exercise it' (CRG, p. 467). That is, if they are organized to exercise 'the power of combined action', the working classes could use their superior numerical strength for 'the promotion of their collective objects' through political elections ('TDA[II]', p. 165; Mill, Chapters on Socialism, p. 707). He says in On Liberty, though: 'The majority have not yet learnt to feel the power of the government their power, or its opinions their opinions.' (OL, p. 223.)
141. 68 CRG, p. 381, emphasis added.
142. 69 CRG, p. 457.
143. 70 Mill, 'Notes on the Newspapers' (No. 1, March 1834), CW, Vol. 6, p. 163. Baines made his name as the editor of the Leeds Mercury. See A. Briggs, The Making of Modern England, 1784-1867 (New York, 1965), p. 237.
144. 70 Mill, 'Notes on the Newspapers' (No. 1, March 1834), CW, Vol. 6, p. 163. Baines made his name as the editor of the Leeds Mercury. See A. Briggs, The Making of Modern England, 1784-1867 (New York, 1965), p. 237.
145. 71 Mill, 'Notes on the Newspapers', p. 163.
146. 72 Ibid., p. 164.
147. 73 'TDA [II]', p. 162.
148. 74 'TDA[II]', p. 165. Mill offered a similar assessment a few years earlier in 'Civilization'. After noting the role of unions and 'benefit societies' as 'instruments of combination', he says: 'A more powerful, though not so ostensible, instrument the combination than any of these, has but lately become universally accessible - the newspaper. The newspaper carries home the voice of the many to every individual among them . . . The newspaper is the telegraph which carries the signal throughout the country, and the flag around which it rallies.' (Mill, 'Civilization', CW, Vol. 18, p. 125.)
149. 74 'TDA[II]', p. 165. Mill offered a similar assessment a few years earlier in 'Civilization'. After noting the role of unions and 'benefit societies' as 'instruments of combination', he says: 'A more powerful, though not so ostensible, instrument the combination than any of these, has but lately become universally accessible - the newspaper. The newspaper carries home the voice of the many to every individual among them . . . The newspaper is the telegraph which carries the signal throughout the country, and the flag around which it rallies.' (Mill, 'Civilization', CW, Vol. 18, p. 125.)
150. 75 'TDA[II]', p. 165.
151. 76 Ibid.
152. 77 'TDA[II]', pp. 164-6, 191-5.
153. 78 Mill, 'French and English Journals' (2 December 1832), CW, Vol. 23, p. 529. Joseph Hamburger notes that in the early 1830s there was a four-penny tax on 'all newpapers, which increased the cost of most papers to seven pence - a prohibitive price for large segments of the populace'. See J. Hamburger, Intellectuals in Politics: John Stuart Mill and the Philosophic Radicals (New Haven, 1965), p. 128. See also G. Boyce, 'The Fourth Estate: The Reappraisal of a Concept', in Newspaper History: From the Seventeenth Century to the Present Day, ed. G. Boyce, J. Curran and P. Wingate (London, 1978), pp. 24-5.
154. 78 Mill, 'French and English Journals' (2 December 1832), CW, Vol. 23, p. 529. Joseph Hamburger notes that in the early 1830s there was a four-penny tax on 'all newpapers, which increased the cost of most papers to seven pence - a prohibitive price for large segments of the populace'. See J. Hamburger, Intellectuals in Politics: John Stuart Mill and the Philosophic Radicals (New Haven, 1965), p. 128. See also G. Boyce, 'The Fourth Estate: The Reappraisal of a Concept', in Newspaper History: From the Seventeenth Century to the Present Day, ed. G. Boyce, J. Curran and P. Wingate (London, 1978), pp. 24-5.
155. 78 Mill, 'French and English Journals' (2 December 1832), CW, Vol. 23, p. 529. Joseph Hamburger notes that in the early 1830s there was a four-penny tax on 'all newpapers, which increased the cost of most papers to seven pence - a prohibitive price for large segments of the populace'. See J. Hamburger, Intellectuals in Politics: John Stuart Mill and the Philosophic Radicals (New Haven, 1965), p. 128. See also G. Boyce, 'The Fourth Estate: The Reappraisal of a Concept', in Newspaper History: From the Seventeenth Century to the Present Day, ed. G. Boyce, J. Curran and P. Wingate (London, 1978), pp. 24-5.
156. 79 Mill, 'Parliamentary Proceedings of the Session' (July 1835), CW, Vol. 6, p. 298. Mill develops further his political economics case against these taxes in principles of Political Economy, pp. 860-1.
157. 79 Mill, 'Parliamentary Proceedings of the Session' (July 1835), CW, Vol. 6, p. 298. Mill develops further his political economics case against these taxes in principles of Political Economy, pp. 860-1.
158. 80 Hamburger, Intellectuals in Politics, pp. 128, 166.
159. 81 Ibid., p. 128; Boyce, 'The Fourth Estate', p. 25; S. Koss, The Rise and Fall of the Political Press in Britain, Vol. 1, The Nineteeth Century (Chapel Hill, NC, 1981), p. 1; and M. Taylor, The Decline of British Radicalism, 1847-1860 (Oxford, 1995), p. 357.
160. 81 Ibid., p. 128; Boyce, 'The Fourth Estate', p. 25; S. Koss, The Rise and Fall of the Political Press in Britain, Vol. 1, The Nineteeth Century (Chapel Hill, NC, 1981), p. 1; and M. Taylor, The Decline of British Radicalism, 1847-1860 (Oxford, 1995), p. 357.
161. 81 Ibid., p. 128; Boyce, 'The Fourth Estate', p. 25; S. Koss, The Rise and Fall of the Political Press in Britain, Vol. 1, The Nineteeth Century (Chapel Hill, NC, 1981), p. 1; and M. Taylor, The Decline of British Radicalism, 1847-1860 (Oxford, 1995), p. 357.
162. 81 Ibid., p. 128; Boyce, 'The Fourth Estate', p. 25; S. Koss, The Rise and Fall of the Political Press in Britain, Vol. 1, The Nineteeth Century (Chapel Hill, NC, 1981), p. 1; and M. Taylor, The Decline of British Radicalism, 1847-1860 (Oxford, 1995), p. 357.
163. 82 Hamburger, Intellectuals in Politics, pp. 129, 166-8; A. Lee, The Origins of the Popular Press in England, 1855-1914 (London, 1976), p. 43; Taylor, The Decline of British Radicalism, p. 356.
164. 82 Hamburger, Intellectuals in Politics, pp. 129, 166-8; A. Lee, The Origins of the Popular Press in England, 1855-1914 (London, 1976), p. 43; Taylor, The Decline of British Radicalism, p. 356.
165. 82 Hamburger, Intellectuals in Politics, pp. 129, 166-8; A. Lee, The Origins of the Popular Press in England, 1855-1914 (London, 1976), p. 43; Taylor, The Decline of British Radicalism, p. 356.
166. 83 Koss, The Rise and Fall of the Political Press in Britain, p. 1.
167. 84 Boyce, 'The Fourth Estate', p. 22. Five hundred new titles were started in the provinces between 1855 and 1861, but many of these failed quickly; and although start-ups accelerated after 1855, this growth of the press followed steady expansion between 1830 and 1855. See Taylor, The Decline of British Radicalism, p. 356.
168. 84 Boyce, 'The Fourth Estate', p. 22. Five hundred new titles were started in the provinces between 1855 and 1861, but many of these failed quickly; and although start-ups accelerated after 1855, this growth of the press followed steady expansion between 1830 and 1855. See Taylor, The Decline of British Radicalism, p. 356.
169. 85 Lee, The Origins of the Popular Press in England, p. 49; Boyce, 'The Fourth Estate', p. 25; and Koss, The Rise and Fall of the Political Press in Britain, p. 418.
170. 85 Lee, The Origins of the Popular Press in England, p. 49; Boyce, 'The Fourth Estate', p. 25; and Koss, The Rise and Fall of the Political Press in Britain, p. 418.
171. 85 Lee, The Origins of the Popular Press in England, p. 49; Boyce, 'The Fourth Estate', p. 25; and Koss, The Rise and Fall of the Political Press in Britain, p. 418.
172. 86 Boyce, 'The Fourth Estate', p. 25.
173. 87 Lee, The Origins of the Popular Press in England, pp. 38-41; Boyce, 'The Fourth Estate', p. 25; and Koss, The Rise and Fall of the Political Press in Britain, pp. 3,8-9.
174. 87 Lee, The Origins of the Popular Press in England, pp. 38-41; Boyce, 'The Fourth Estate', p. 25; and Koss, The Rise and Fall of the Political Press in Britain, pp. 3,8-9.
175. 87 Lee, The Origins of the Popular Press in England, pp. 38-41; Boyce, 'The Fourth Estate', p. 25; and Koss, The Rise and Fall of the Political Press in Britain, pp. 3,8-9.
176. 88 Boyce, 'The Fourth Estate', p. 25; A. Lee, 'The Structure, Ownership and Control of the Press, 1855-1914', in Newspaper History, ed. Boyce, Curran and Wingate pp. 118-24.
177. 88 Boyce, 'The Fourth Estate', p. 25; A. Lee, 'The Structure, Ownership and Control of the Press, 1855-1914', in Newspaper History, ed. Boyce, Curran and Wingate pp. 118-24.
178. 89 Lee, 'The Structure', p. 119; Boyce, 'The Fourth Estate', pp. 25-9.
179. 89 Lee, 'The Structure', p. 119; Boyce, 'The Fourth Estate', pp. 25-9.
180. 90 In 1834, he speaks of 'the middle classes of this country, whose opinions and sentiments are represented by the daily press'. Then, concerning debates over trade unions, he adds: 'The middle classes of London, through their organs the London newspapers, are now manifesting . . . [their] feelings [of fear and anger], on the subject of Trades' Unions.' (Mill, 'Notes on the Newspapers, no. VI' (August 1934), CW, Vol. 6, pp. 218, 220.)
181. 91 'TDA[II]', p. 163.
182. 92 Ibid., p. 166.
183. 93 Ibid., p. 194. He expresses similar concern about the power of the wealthy in 'Rationale of Representation': 'In every country where there are rich and poor, the administration of public affairs would, even under the most democratic constitution, be mainly in the hands of the rich . . . The wealthy and leisured classes [have] ten times the means of acquiring personal influence, ten times the means of acquiring intellectual cultivation, which any person can bring into competition with them.' (Mill, 'Rationale of Representation', CW, Vol. 18, p. 26.)
184. 93 Ibid., p. 194. He expresses similar concern about the power of the wealthy in 'Rationale of Representation': 'In every country where there are rich and poor, the administration of public affairs would, even under the most democratic constitution, be mainly in the hands of the rich . . . The wealthy and leisured classes [have] ten times the means of acquiring personal influence, ten times the means of acquiring intellectual cultivation, which any person can bring into competition with them.' (Mill, 'Rationale of Representation', CW, Vol. 18, p. 26.)
185. 94 'TDA[II]', pp. 162, 189, 194-200.
186. 95 Letter to Gustave D'Eichthal, 7 November 1829, CW, Vol. 12, p. 39.
187. Ibid., p. 40. These remarks foreshadow his later analysis of the problem of 'sinister interests' in Representative Government (CRG, pp. 441-7). See W. Sarvacy, 'J.S. Mill's Theory of Democracy for a Period of Transition Between Capitalism and Socialism', Polity, 16 (Summer 1984).
188. Ibid., p. 40. These remarks foreshadow his later analysis of the problem of 'sinister interests' in Representative Government (CRG, pp. 441-7). See W. Sarvacy, 'J.S. Mill's Theory of Democracy for a Period of Transition Between Capitalism and Socialism', Polity, 16 (Summer 1984).
189. Ibid., p. 40. These remarks foreshadow his later analysis of the problem of 'sinister interests' in Representative Government (CRG, pp. 441-7). See W. Sarvacy, 'J.S. Mill's Theory of Democracy for a Period of Transition Between Capitalism and Socialism', Polity, 16 (Summer 1984).
190. 97 OL, p. 268.
191. 98 OL, pp. 268-9.
192. 99 Mill, 'Civilization', p. 135.
193. 100 Mill, Principles of Political Economy, p. 861.
194. 101 Mill, 'Civilization', p. 135.
195. 102 Mill, Principles of Political Economy, p. 764; Mill, Chapters on Socialism, p. 707.
196. 102 Mill, Principles of Political Economy, p. 764; Mill, Chapters on Socialism, p. 707.
197. 103 Mill, Principles of Political Economy, pp. 763-4. He makes a closely related point in an earlier article with respect to the impending removal of taxes on newspapers and political tracts. He says that public debate in England will be invigorated: 'There will now . . . be vastly greater facilities than ever were before known for the diffusion of important truth among the people, and also of mischievous error . . . Truth will now, for the first time, have its natural chances of superiority. In the immensely increased number of readers which will be the effect of the cheapness of newspapers and political tracts, any writers of talent may hope, whatever be their sentiments, to find the quantity of support necessary for a moderate degree of success, without prostituting themselves to the hired advocacy of the opinions in vogue.' (Mill, 'Notes on the Newspapers, no. VI', p. 262.)
198. 103 Mill, Principles of Political Economy, pp. 763-4. He makes a closely related point in an earlier article with respect to the impending removal of taxes on newspapers and political tracts. He says that public debate in England will be invigorated: 'There will now . . . be vastly greater facilities than ever were before known for the diffusion of important truth among the people, and also of mischievous error . . . Truth will now, for the first time, have its natural chances of superiority. In the immensely increased number of readers which will be the effect of the cheapness of newspapers and political tracts, any writers of talent may hope, whatever be their sentiments, to find the quantity of support necessary for a moderate degree of success, without prostituting themselves to the hired advocacy of the opinions in vogue.' (Mill, 'Notes on the Newspapers, no. VI', p. 262.)
199. 104 'TDA[II]', p. 166.
200. 105 Mill, 'Civilization', p. 136. See also 'TDA[II]', pp. 164-6, 191-5; Mill, Principles of Political Economy, pp. 769-93.
201. 105 Mill, 'Civilization', p. 136. See also 'TDA[II]', pp. 164-6, 191-5; Mill, Principles of Political Economy, pp. 769-93.
202. 105 Mill, 'Civilization', p. 136. See also 'TDA[II]', pp. 164-6, 191-5; Mill, Principles of Political Economy, pp. 769-93.
203. 106 Mill discussed such possibilities in letters in 1871 and 1873. In an 1871 letter to William Dougal Christie he says: 'The only thing I know of which would effect newspaper reform would be to start a first rate newspaper.' He notes significant financial obstacles to this task, however, and therefore he recommends that they try to use their influence to improve existing newspapers (2 January 1871, CW, Vol. 17, p. 1793). In 1873 Mill worked on a plan to give an existing paper, The Examiner, 'a circulation among the working classes, as well as to give it a new character in some other respects' (Letter to Frederic Harrison, 13 April 1873, CW, Vol. 17, p. 1949).
204. 106 Mill discussed such possibilities in letters in 1871 and 1873. In an 1871 letter to William Dougal Christie he says: 'The only thing I know of which would effect newspaper reform would be to start a first rate newspaper.' He notes significant financial obstacles to this task, however, and therefore he recommends that they try to use their influence to improve existing newspapers (2 January 1871, CW, Vol. 17, p. 1793). In 1873 Mill worked on a plan to give an existing paper, The Examiner, 'a circulation among the working classes, as well as to give it a new character in some other respects' (Letter to Frederic Harrison, 13 April 1873, CW, Vol. 17, p. 1949).
205. 107 Gordon, 'John Stuart Mill and the "Marketplace of Ideas"'. Cf. J.R. Pole, 'A Bad Case of Agoraphobia: Is There a Marketplace of Ideas?', Times Literary Supplement (4 February 1994); R. McChesney, 'The New Theology of the First Amendment: Class Privilege Over Democracy', Monthly Review, 49 (March 1998). Mill's account of market competition and the 'grounds and limits' of laissez faire suggests, however, that he would by no means favour simply abandoning the use of market mechanisms to allocate communication resources.
206. 107 Gordon, 'John Stuart Mill and the "Marketplace of Ideas"'. Cf. J.R. Pole, 'A Bad Case of Agoraphobia: Is There a Marketplace of Ideas?', Times Literary Supplement (4 February 1994); R. McChesney, 'The New Theology of the First Amendment: Class Privilege Over Democracy', Monthly Review, 49 (March 1998). Mill's account of market competition and the 'grounds and limits' of laissez faire suggests, however, that he would by no means favour simply abandoning the use of market mechanisms to allocate communication resources.
207. 107 Gordon, 'John Stuart Mill and the "Marketplace of Ideas"'. Cf. J.R. Pole, 'A Bad Case of Agoraphobia: Is There a Marketplace of Ideas?', Times Literary Supplement (4 February 1994); R. McChesney, 'The New Theology of the First Amendment: Class Privilege Over Democracy', Monthly Review, 49 (March 1998). Mill's account of market competition and the 'grounds and limits' of laissez faire suggests, however, that he would by no means favour simply abandoning the use of market mechanisms to allocate communication resources.
208. 108 OL, p. 219, Mill's emphasis. He warns against the tyranny of the majority immediately following this passage. Since 'the people' are rarely all the people, he says, they 'may desire to oppress a part of their number; and precautions are as much needed against this as against any other abuse of power' (ibid.).
209. 109 OL, p. 223.
210. 110 I use the term 'unreformed' capitalism here because there is some debate over whether Mill's own political-economic ideal is best regarded as a radically reformed kind of capitalism or as a kind of market socialism. Cf. Lionel Robbins, The Theory of Economic Policy in Classical Political Economy (London, 1952), pp. 159-60; Riley, 'J.S. Mill's Liberal Utilitarian Assessment of Capitalism Versus Socialism'; and Baum, 'J.S. Mill's Conception of Economic Freedom'.
211. 110 I use the term 'unreformed' capitalism here because there is some debate over whether Mill's own political-economic ideal is best regarded as a radically reformed kind of capitalism or as a kind of market socialism. Cf. Lionel Robbins, The Theory of Economic Policy in Classical Political Economy (London, 1952), pp. 159-60; Riley, 'J.S. Mill's Liberal Utilitarian Assessment of Capitalism Versus Socialism'; and Baum, 'J.S. Mill's Conception of Economic Freedom'.
212. 110 I use the term 'unreformed' capitalism here because there is some debate over whether Mill's own political-economic ideal is best regarded as a radically reformed kind of capitalism or as a kind of market socialism. Cf. Lionel Robbins, The Theory of Economic Policy in Classical Political Economy (London, 1952), pp. 159-60; Riley, 'J.S. Mill's Liberal Utilitarian Assessment of Capitalism Versus Socialism'; and Baum, 'J.S. Mill's Conception of Economic Freedom'.
213. 111 See Habermas, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere, Chs. 20-5; M. Miller, 'Free the Media', The Nation, 262 (3 June 1996); B. Page, 'The Mass Media as Political Actors', PS: Political Science and Politics, 29 (March 1996), pp. 20-4; and R. McChesney, Corporate Media and the Threat to Democracy. The United States in particular is increasingly seeing ownership of major media outlets, including the NBC, ABC and CBS television networks and their respective news divisions, by other major corporations. Disney owns ABC, General Electric owns NBC, and Westinghouse owns CBS. As Ben Bagdikian says, the new media leaders in the United States, with minor exceptions, 'share highly conservative political and economic values. Most also own interests in other industries - defense, consumer products and services; firms like General Electric, Westinghouse, and the country's cash-rich telephone companies - and have shown little hesitation in using their control of the news to support the fortunes of their other subsidiaries' (B. Bagdikian, 'Preface to the Fifth Edition', The Media Monopoly (Boston, 5th edn., 1997), pp. xi, xxv-xxvi). The problem, moreover, is not just oligopolistic ownership and control of major media outlets, but also the dependence of major media outlets on the advertising revenues from other major corporations.
214. 111 See Habermas, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere, Chs. 20-5; M. Miller, 'Free the Media', The Nation, 262 (3 June 1996); B. Page, 'The Mass Media as Political Actors', PS: Political Science and Politics, 29 (March 1996), pp. 20-4; and R. McChesney, Corporate Media and the Threat to Democracy. The United States in particular is increasingly seeing ownership of major media outlets, including the NBC, ABC and CBS television networks and their respective news divisions, by other major corporations. Disney owns ABC, General Electric owns NBC, and Westinghouse owns CBS. As Ben Bagdikian says, the new media leaders in the United States, with minor exceptions, 'share highly conservative political and economic values. Most also own interests in other industries - defense, consumer products and services; firms like General Electric, Westinghouse, and the country's cash-rich telephone companies - and have shown little hesitation in using their control of the news to support the fortunes of their other subsidiaries' (B. Bagdikian, 'Preface to the Fifth Edition', The Media Monopoly (Boston, 5th edn., 1997), pp. xi, xxv-xxvi). The problem, moreover, is not just oligopolistic ownership and control of major media outlets, but also the dependence of major media outlets on the advertising revenues from other major corporations.
215. 111 See Habermas, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere, Chs. 20-5; M. Miller, 'Free the Media', The Nation, 262 (3 June 1996); B. Page, 'The Mass Media as Political Actors', PS: Political Science and Politics, 29 (March 1996), pp. 20-4; and R. McChesney, Corporate Media and the Threat to Democracy. The United States in particular is increasingly seeing ownership of major media outlets, including the NBC, ABC and CBS television networks and their respective news divisions, by other major corporations. Disney owns ABC, General Electric owns NBC, and Westinghouse owns CBS. As Ben Bagdikian says, the new media leaders in the United States, with minor exceptions, 'share highly conservative political and economic values. Most also own interests in other industries - defense, consumer products and services; firms like General Electric, Westinghouse, and the country's cash-rich telephone companies - and have shown little hesitation in using their control of the news to support the fortunes of their other subsidiaries' (B. Bagdikian, 'Preface to the Fifth Edition', The Media Monopoly (Boston, 5th edn., 1997), pp. xi, xxv-xxvi). The problem, moreover, is not just oligopolistic ownership and control of major media outlets, but also the dependence of major media outlets on the advertising revenues from other major corporations.
216. 111 See Habermas, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere, Chs. 20-5; M. Miller, 'Free the Media', The Nation, 262 (3 June 1996); B. Page, 'The Mass Media as Political Actors', PS: Political Science and Politics, 29 (March 1996), pp. 20-4; and R. McChesney, Corporate Media and the Threat to Democracy. The United States in particular is increasingly seeing ownership of major media outlets, including the NBC, ABC and CBS television networks and their respective news divisions, by other major corporations. Disney owns ABC, General Electric owns NBC, and Westinghouse owns CBS. As Ben Bagdikian says, the new media leaders in the United States, with minor exceptions, 'share highly conservative political and economic values. Most also own interests in other industries - defense, consumer products and services; firms like General Electric, Westinghouse, and the country's cash-rich telephone companies -and have shown little hesitation in using their control of the news to support the fortunes of their other subsidiaries' (B. Bagdikian, 'Preface to the Fifth Edition', The Media Monopoly (Boston, 5th edn., 1997), pp. xi, xxv-xxvi). The problem, moreover, is not just oligopolistic ownership and control of major media outlets, but also the dependence of major media outlets on the advertising revenues from other major corporations.
217. 111 See Habermas, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere, Chs. 20-5; M. Miller, 'Free the Media', The Nation, 262 (3 June 1996); B. Page, 'The Mass Media as Political Actors', PS: Political Science and Politics, 29 (March 1996), pp. 20-4; and R. McChesney, Corporate Media and the Threat to Democracy. The United States in particular is increasingly seeing ownership of major media outlets, including the NBC, ABC and CBS television networks and their respective news divisions, by other major corporations. Disney owns ABC, General Electric owns NBC, and Westinghouse owns CBS. As Ben Bagdikian says, the new media leaders in the United States, with minor exceptions, 'share highly conservative political and economic values. Most also own interests in other industries - defense, consumer products and services; firms like General Electric, Westinghouse, and the country's cash-rich telephone companies - and have shown little hesitation in using their control of the news to support the fortunes of their other subsidiaries' (B. Bagdikian, 'Preface to the Fifth Edition', The Media Monopoly (Boston, 5th edn., 1997), pp. xi, xxv-xxvi). The problem, moreover, is not just oligopolistic ownership and control of major media outlets, but also the dependence of major media outlets on the advertising revenues from other major corporations.