Alexis Collins

USCH 1113-Modernity
Inquiry Question-Mill
A lot is covered by Mill, and even more questions arise from his many observations (like
where is the line drawn between rebuking someone as foolish, thereby offering constructive
criticism, and stifling geniuses of different opinions.) From a political perspective, at times, he
will appear to side with both Conservatives and Progressives (which, as sects, had yet to be
recognized during his time.) He early on establishes that oppression of liberty can take place
within any political context: within monarchy, through the monarch choosing not to educate the
masses, or undermining their opinions; or within Democracy where the majority exhibits
tyrannical behavior and dissuades the unique individuals from expressing their viewpoints. So,
within this paradigm, we can assume that Communism is not completely opposed by Mill.
Mill gives equal right to opinion (and action of those opinions) to people of all classes,
races, and genders. This is something that Marx is driven by. Marx desires that people cease to
be deemed as mere commodities, whose worth is placed solely in their ability to work, and it
gives them an equal standing to their oppressors.
However, Mill is also deeply critical of cultural assimilation. All examples we have of
Communism (though they could be argued as having been carried out against Marxs initial
intent,) have necessarily resulted in robbing the individual of his or herself. They do not
encourage discourse because discourse leads to roles of superior versus inferior, and so on. The
goal of Communism is to rob individuals of all status (which, again, Mill does not openly
rebuke,) and this tends to stifle genius.
Another area of clear dispute (especially given the advocacy of Socialist demagogues like
Benito Mussolini, Francis Bellamy, and Adolf Hitler,) arises within the context of government
regulated schooling. The entire point of Mills essay is to advocate open discussion of all
opinions. The only way to arrive at a full understanding of truth is through observation of all
possible options. This cannot take place if (in my own words) the youth are brainwashed by the
government. Schooling should certainly be offered to everyone (according to Mill and Marxists,
implied within the Manifesto,) however, according to Mill, the government should not contribute
to this form of public schooling, except through means of financing alone. Marx wants the
leaders to be directly involved in these areas, and he certainly does not show signs of advocating
a superior versus inferior education inherent in different schooling methods.
A lot of what Mill claims resonates with Kant, specifically his ideas about geniuses and
truth. Truth can only be arrived at (and at the very least, fully understood) through the lenses of
many different people from many different contexts and opinions. Kant expresses that in order
for people to arrive at truth, they must understand their own thinking, the opinions of those
around them, and to think consistently. Truth is a direct result of dialogue and conflict with
society. Mill almost seems to take Kants geniuses to the next level, but equipping them with
grounds for expressing it beyond art. Geniuses are also to be recognized by their level of social
ostracism and personal eccentricity: their desire/efforts to avoid placing themselves within a
given stereotype that is recognized as legitimate by society.
In light of this and given experience within a contemporary context, I would like to say
that Mills definition of a genius does fall apart when eccentricity becomes a stereotype in and
of itself. We see this all over Seattle: people who dye their hair in odd colors and cut it in odd
ways, who go biking naked, or who scorn society are often far from geniuses under this

definition. They are still assimilating, but to the eccentric stereotype. They do not arrive at
such conclusions from personal observation and insight, but because they were affected by the
society that says non-conformist is legitimate. They are not truly scorned by society so long as
there is a society (the eccentrics) who accept them.