Barbarian thoughts: Imperialism in the philosophy of John Stuart Mill

Review of International Studies

Volumn 31, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 599-618

  Jahn, Beate ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 22144461451     PISSN: 02602105     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0260210505006650     Document Type: Review

References (156)

1. Paul A. Passavant, No Escape: Freedom of Speech and the Paradox of Rights (New York: New York University Press, 2002);
2. Uday Singh Mehta, Liberalism and Empire (Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press, 1999);
3. Eddy M. Souffrant, Formal Transgressions: John Stuart Mill's Philosophy of International Affairs (Lanham: Roman and Littlefield, 2000);
4. Bikhu Parekh, 'Decolonizing Liberalism', in Aleksandras Shtromas (ed.), The End of 'Isms'! (Oxford: Blackwell, 1994) pp. 85-103;
5. Barry Hindess, 'Liberalism - What's in a Name?', in Wendy Warner and William Walters (eds.), Global Governmentality (London: Routledge, 2004);
6. Jennifer Pitts, 'Legislator of the World?' in Political Theory, 31 (2003).
7. Michael Cox, 'The Empire's Back in Town: or America's Imperial Temptation - Again', in Millennium, 32 (2003), p. 5.
8. John Stuart Mill, 'A Few Words on Non-Intervention' in John M. Robson (ed.), The Collected Works of John Stuart Mill (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1984), vol. XXI, pp. 109-24.
9. See, for example, Hedley Bull, The Anarchical Society (New York: Columbia University Press, 1977), pp. 251f;
10. Charles Beitz, Political Theory and International Relations (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1979), especially Part II, chs. 2 and 3;
11. John Vincent, Nonintervention and International Order (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1974), pp. 54-6;
12. Michael Walzer, Just and Unjust Wars (New York: Basic Books, 1992), pp. 87-96;
13. Georgios Varouxakis, 'John Stuart Mill on Intervention and Non-Intervention', Millennium, 26 (1997), pp. 57-76;
14. Robert Jackson, Quasi-States: Sovereignty, International Relations and the Third World (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990).
15. Jackson engages quite extensively with Mill's arguments and also quotes Utilitarianism and On Liberty, but the discussion itself revolves around questions of sovereignty and intervention. A shortened version of A Few Words on Non-intervention has also been included in a recent anthology edited by Chris Brown, Terry Nardin and Nicholas Rengger, International Relations in Political Thought (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002),
16. which again does not make reference to any other of John Stuart Mill's writings. At the same time, John Stuart Mill is not mentioned, for instance, in Gerrit Gong's The Standard of Civilization' in International Society (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1984) despite the fact that the book addresses the emergence of culturally based international theory and practice in the 19th century for which Mill must count as an outstanding representative.
17. In Political Theory A Few Words on Non-intervention is hardly ever mentioned. Instead, leading among the texts which attract the attention of political philosophers is On Liberty edited by David Spitz (New York: W. W. Norton, 1975)
18. followed, in no particular order, by 'Considerations on Representative Government' in On Liberty and Other Essays, edited by John Gray (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998), pp. 203-467;
19. Principles of Political Economy, edited by Jonathan Riley (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998);
20. 'The Subjection of Women' in On Liberty and Other Essays, pp. 469-582;
21. 'Utilitarianism' in John Stuart Mill and Jeremy Bentham (London: Penguin, 1987), pp. 272-338;
22. 'Coleridge' in Mill and Bentham, pp. 177-226; and '
23. Bentham' in Mill and Bentham, pp. 132-75.
24. For discussions of Mill's epistemological position, 'A System of Logic' in Collected Works, vols. VII and VIII, is important and his Autobiography edited by John M. Robson (London: Penguin, 1998)
25. is frequently cited in support of interpretations of his motivations. But although Mill's work at India House (as well as his father's involvement with India House, Bentham and the Utilitarians) is often mentioned, the question of Mill's position on international affairs as such does not play a role. A good indication of the general perception of Mill is found in The Cambridge Companion to Mill edited by John Skorupski (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998) in which only Robson's chapter, one among fourteen, addresses Mill's position on civilisation and culture without, however, investigating their importance for his international theory. As always, there are a few exceptions, some of which, however, tend to prove the rule.
26. F. R. Flournoy, 'British Liberal Theories of International Relations 1848-1898', Journal of the History of Ideas, 7 (1946), pp. 195-217,
27. and K. E. Miller, 'John Stuart Mill's Theory of International Relations', Journal of the History of Ideas, 22 (1961), pp. 493-514, are interested in Mill's status amongst British liberal internationalists of the 19th century.
28. Lynn Zastoupil, John Stuart Mill and India (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1994)
29. and Eileen Sullivan, 'Liberalism and Empire: J. S. Mill's Defense of the British Empire', Journal of the History of Ideas, 44 (1983), pp. 599-617,
30. investigate the impact of Mill's India experience on his domestic writings, while A. L. Harris, 'John Stuart Mill: Servant of the East India Company', Cambridge Journal of Economics, 30 (1964), pp. 185-202,
31. and Souffrant, 'Liberalism', directly address Mill's defence of colonialism.
32. For the remainder of this article, references without an author's name refer to writings of John Stuart Mill. 'Liberty', pp. 11, 57, 66, 86;
33. 'Considerations', especially chapter IV;
34. 'Bentham', pp. 159, 164;
35. 'Coleridge', pp. 193f;
36. 'Utilitarianism', pp. 303f.
37. 'Considerations', p. 207.
38. Ibid., pp. 232, 260;
39. John Stuart Mill, 'Civilization' in John M. Robson (ed.), The Collected Works of John Stuart Mill (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1977), vol. XVIII, p. 120.
40. 'Considerations', pp. 232, 233.
41. Ibid., pp. 233f.
42. 'Non-Intervention', pp. 111ff;
43. 'Civilization', pp. 120f.
44. 'Considerations', p. 210.
45. James Mill, The History of British India (New Delhi: Atlantic Publishers, 1990), p. 479.
46. 'Considerations', pp. 262, 261, 264, 212.
47. Ibid., pp. 224, 241.
48. Ibid., pp. 234f.
49. Ibid., pp. 264, 231.
50. Ibid., p. 264.
51. John M. Robson, 'Rational Animals and Others', in John M. Robson and Michael Laine (eds.), James and John Stuart Mill/Papers of the Centenary Conference (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1976), p. 159.
52. 'Considerations', p. 241.
53. 'Autobiography', p. 195.
54. 'Considerations', p. 217.
55. 'Non-Intervention', p. 118.
56. 'Considerations', pp. 427f;
57. 'Coleridge', p. 195.
58. 'Utilitarianism', p. 303.
59. 'Civilization', p. 120.
60. 'Non-Intervention', p. 119.
61. 'Considerations', p. 441.
62. 'Non-Intervention', p. 120-2.
63. 'Non-Intervention', pp. 123, 121. See Varouxakis 'Intervention' for a detailed discussion of the development of Mill's position on intervention between European states.
64. 'Considerations', pp. 447, 449, 451.
65. Ibid., pp.428, 431, 433f.
66. Ibid., pp. 432, 453, 454.
67. Ibid., pp. 455, 456, 461.
68. Brown et al., 'International Relations', p. 465.
69. 'Civilization', p. 119.
70. Nadia Urbinati, Mill on Democracy (Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press, 2002), p. 179;
71. Passavant, 'No Escape', pp. 101, 109.
72. 'Civilization', pp. 120f.
73. Ibid., p. 122.
74. Ibid., pp. 125f, 129, 132.
75. 'Considerations', p. 313.
76. 'Liberty', pp. 6, 65.
77. Ibid., pp. 66-8.
78. 'Civilization', pp. 119, 135.
79. 'Liberty', pp. 14, 17ff, 53ff, 88, 98.
80. 'Considerations', pp. 335-8, 406f.
81. 'Liberty', p. 86.
82. Souffrant, 'Transgressions', p. 103.
83. Mehta, 'Liberalism', p. 93.
84. See Beate Jahn, The Cultural Construction of International Relations (Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2000),
85. and Ronald L. Meek, Social Science and the Ignoble Savage (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1976), for an account of the general importance of a philosophy of history based on civilisational stages for Enlightenment thought. This philosophy of history, thus, does not only haunt liberalism but famously Marxism as well.
86. See, for instance, Friedrich Engels, The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State (Peking: Foreign Languages Press, 1978). While Marxists have tended to criticise capitalist colonial adventures, Marx still considered the destruction of indigenous cultures through European colonialism as a necessary step towards progress and communism.
87. See Karl Marx, 'The British Rule in India' in Surveys from Exile, edited by David Fernbach (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1973). Neither was Mill the only author who saw the corrupting nature of civilisation.
88. Jean Jacques Rousseau probably took this argument furthest in his 'Discourse on the Origin of Inequality' in The Social Contract and Discourses (London: J. M. Dent, 1993). Since civilisation and savagery were defined in relational terms, the ambivalent conception of civilisation was generally matched by an ambivalent conception of savagery as the lowest, natural, rung on the developmental ladder, yet as such simultaneously providing the basic values for an ideal society based on human nature.
89. For a discussion see Jahn, 'Cultural Construction', pp. 122ff.
90. In On Liberty (p. 45) he comments approvingly on Rousseau's disruptive arguments for the 18th century belief in the unfettered and automatic good of civilisation; he has written two extensive reviews of Tocqueville's Democracy in America (Collected Works, vol. XVIII, pp. 47-90, 153-204);
91. he knew Montesquieu's writings, even if not commenting on them in 'Montesquieu' (Collected Works, vol. XXVI, pp. 443-53);
92. he discusses Locke and Kant, for instance, in 'Coleridge' (p. 186f); and, having read the proof sheets at an early age, he knew the literature his father had used in the History of British India which included travel literature,
93. Adam Ferguson's An Essay on the History of Civil Society (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995), and Voltaire, in addition to a variety of publications on India as well as other non-European and ancient nations (James Mill provides extensive notes and references at the end of each chapter of his History). James Mill was deeply influenced by the Scottish Enlightenment and, in particular, by its philosophical history as represented in Adam Smith, Adam Ferguson, John Millar and Dugald Stewart.
94. See J. H. Burns, 'The Light of Reason: Philosophical History in the Two Mills' in Robson et al. (eds.), 'James and John Stuart Mill', p. 4.
95. Mehta, 'Liberalism', pp. 31, 36, 49, 76;
96. Hindess, 'What's in a Name?'.
97. 'Coleridge', p. 188.
98. 'Considerations', p. 466.
99. J. Mill, 'History', pp. 461, 456.
100. 'Autobiography', pp.40, 158.
101. Ibid., pp. 80f.
102. Sullivan, 'Mill's Defense';
103. Zastoupil, 'Mill and India'.
104. John Gray, 'Introduction' in On Liberty and Other Essays (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998), pp. xxi, xxix.
105. See 'Autobiography', p. 182;
106. 'Considerations', pp. 396-8, 406f, 466;
107. The Petition of the East India Company and various other documents relating to the abolition of the Company's rule in 1858, published in 'Writings on India' in Collected Works, vol. XXX.
108. 'Considerations', p. 231.
109. 'Civilization', p. 122.
110. J. Mill, 'History', p. 481.
111. 'Civilization', p. 122;
112. J. Mill, 'History', pp. 469, 481.
113. 'Civilization', p. 123.
114. Mehta, 'Liberalism', 91, 78, 76, 89;
115. Parekh, 'Decolonizing Liberalism', p. 92f.
116. Mehta, 'Liberalism', pp. 93, 5f.
117. 'Civilization', p. 135.
118. 'Coleridge', p. 182.
119. 'Principles', p. 129.
120. Mehta, 'Liberalism', p. 100.
121. 'Bentham', p. 148.
122. 'Coleridge', p. 200.
123. 'Principles', pp. 126, 129.
124. Passavant, 'No Escape', p. 2;
125. Mehta, 'Liberalism', pp. 101, 104;
126. Parekh, 'Decolonizing Liberalism', p. 98.
127. Mehta, 'Liberalism', p. 104;
128. Parekh, 'Decolonizing Liberalism', p. 99.
129. Parekh, 'Decolonizing Liberalism', p. 94;
130. Passavant, 'No Escape', p. 108.
131. Passavant, 'No Escape', pp. 93, 86, xiif.
132. Parekh, 'Decolonizing Liberalism', p. 95ff.
133. John Rawls, The Law of Peoples (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2001), pp. 81, 106.
134. Mehta, 'Liberalism', p. 112.
135. Beitz, 'Political Theory', pp. 91f.
136. Andrew Linklater, The Transformation of Political Community (Cambridge: Polity, 1998), p. 167.
137. Michael Doyle, 'Kant, Liberal Legacies, and International Affairs', Philosophy and Public Affairs, 12 (1983), pp. 217, 344;
138. Francis Fukuyama, 'The End of History', The National Interest (1989).
139. Samuel Huntington, 'The Clash of Civilizations?', Foreign Affairs, 72 (1993).
140. Souffrant, 'Transgressions', p. 136.
141. Mehta, 'Liberalism', p. 91.
142. Gray, 'Introduction', pp. xxi, xxix;
143. G. W. Smith, 'The Logic of J. S. Mill on Freedom', Political Studies (1980), pp. 238-52.
144. Robson, 'Rational Animals', p. 146.
145. Edward Alexander, 'The Principles of Permanence and Progression in the Thought of J. S. Mill' in Robson et al. (eds.), 'James and John Stuart Mill', pp. 126-42.
146. Burns, 'Light of Reason', pp. 3-20.
147. R. J. Halliday, 'Some Recent Interpretations of John Stuart Mill', Philosophy, 43 (1968), pp. 1-17.
148. M. Hollis, 'J. S. Mill's Political Philosophy of Mind', Philosophy, 47 (1972), pp. 334-47;
149. D. G. Brown, 'Mill on Liberty and Morality', Philosophical Review Quarterly, LXXXI (1972), pp. 133-58;
150. C. L. Ten, 'Mill and Liberty', Journal of the History of Ideas, 30 (1969), pp. 47-68;
151. T. Honderich, 'The Worth of J. S. Mill "On Liberty" ', Political Studies, XXII (1974), pp. 463-70.
152. R. F. Ladenson, 'Mill's Conception of Individuality', Social Theory and Practice, 4 (1977), pp. 167-82;
153. G. L. Williams, 'Mill's Principle of Liberty', Political Studies, XXIV (1976), pp. 132-40.
154. Urbinati, 'Democracy', pp. 178f.
155. In her entire study, Urbinati does not mention India, colonialism, imperialism or Mill's philosophy of history once. She represents Mill's position on 'backward peoples' as 'egalitarian and participatory in principle' because they are not considered 'nonhuman' and their enjoyment of equal rights is only 'temporarily' suspended ('Democracy', p. 177).
156. 'Considerations', p. 454.