Editing John Stuart Mill (section)

===Economic philosophy===
{{Socialism in the UK|Intellectuals}}
{{Main|Principles of Political Economy}}
[[File:Mill - Essays on economics and society, 1967 - 5499347.tif|thumb|''Essays on Economics and Society'', 1967]]
Mill's early [[Philosophy and economics|economic philosophy]] was one of [[free market]]s. However, he accepted interventions in the economy, such as a tax on alcohol, if there were sufficient [[utilitarian]] grounds. He also accepted the principle of legislative intervention for the purpose of animal welfare.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.ifaw.org/ifaw/dfiles/file_285.pdf |title=Ifaw.org |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080626225342/http://www.ifaw.org/ifaw/dfiles/file_285.pdf|archive-date=26 June 2008}}</ref> He originally believed that "equality of taxation" meant "[[equality of sacrifice]]" and that [[progressive tax]]ation penalized those who worked harder and saved more and was therefore "a mild form of robbery".<ref>
[http://www.irefeurope.org/col_docs/doc_51_fr.pdf IREF | Pour la liberte economique et la concurrence fiscale]. {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090327011315/http://www.irefeurope.org/col_docs/doc_51_fr.pdf|date=27 March 2009}} (PDF).
</ref>

Given an equal tax rate regardless of income, Mill agreed that [[inheritance]] should be taxed. A utilitarian society would agree that everyone should be equal one way or another. Therefore, receiving inheritance would put one ahead of society unless taxed on the inheritance. Those who donate should consider and choose carefully where their money goes—some charities are more deserving than others. Considering public charities boards such as a government will disburse the money equally. However, a private charity board like a church would disburse the monies fairly to those who are in more need than others.{{sfn|Strasser|1991}}{{page needed|date=October 2023}}

Later he altered his views toward a more [[socialist]] bent, adding chapters to his ''Principles of Political Economy'' in defence of a socialist outlook, and defending some socialist causes.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Mill |first1=John Stuart |url=https://archive.org/details/utilitarianismot00mill/page/11 |title=Utilitarianism and Other Essays |last2=Bentham |first2=Jeremy |publisher=Penguin Books |year=2004 |isbn=978-0140432725 |editor-last=Ryan |editor-first=Alan. |location=London |page=[https://archive.org/details/utilitarianismot00mill/page/11 11]}}</ref> Within this revised work he also made the radical proposal that the whole wage system be abolished in favour of a co-operative wage system. Nonetheless, some of his views on the idea of flat taxation remained,<ref name="stanford">{{cite journal |last=Wilson |first=Fred |title=John Stuart Mill: Political Economy |journal=Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |year=2007 |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2016/entries/mill/#PolEco |access-date=4 May 2009}}</ref> albeit altered in the third edition of the ''Principles of Political Economy'' to reflect a concern for differentiating restrictions on "unearned" incomes, which he favoured, and those on "earned" incomes, which he did not favour.<ref name="principles online">{{cite book |last=Mill |first=John Stuart |chapter=On The General Principles of Taxation, V.2.14 |title=Principles of Political Economy |publisher=[[Library of Economics and Liberty]] |edition=3rd |year=1852}} The passage about flat taxation was altered by the author in this edition, which is acknowledged in this online edition's footnote 8: "[This sentence replaced in the 3rd ed. a sentence of the original: 'It is partial taxation, which is a mild form of robbery.']")</ref>

In his autobiography, Mill stated that in relation to his later views on political economy, his "ideal of ultimate improvement... would class [him] decidedly under the general designation of Socialists." His views shifted partly due to reading the works of [[utopian socialists]], but also from the influence of Harriet Taylor.<ref name=mcmanus>{{cite web |url=https://jacobinmag.com/2021/05/john-stewart-js-mill-liberal-socialism-locke-madison |title=Was John Stuart Mill a Socialist? |last=McManus |first=Matt |date=30 May 2021 |website=[[Jacobin (magazine)|Jacobin]] |access-date=1 June 2021}}</ref> In his 1879 work ''Socialism'', Mill argued that the prevalence of poverty in contemporary industrial capitalist societies was "''pro tanto'' a failure of the social arrangements", and that attempts to condone this state of affairs as being the result of individual failings did not represent a justification of them but instead were "an irresistible claim upon every human being for protection against suffering".<ref>{{cite book |last1=Mill |first1=John Stuart |year=2011 |orig-date=1st pub. Belfords, Clarke & Co.:1879 |title=Socialism |url=https://www.gutenberg.org/files/38138/38138-h/38138-h.htm|publisher=[[Project Gutenberg]] |page=29|access-date=1 June 2021}}</ref>

Mill's ''Principles'', first published in 1848, was one of the most widely read of all books on economics in the period.<ref>{{cite book |author1=Ekelund, Robert B. Jr. |author2=Hébert, Robert F. |title=A History of Economic Theory and Method |edition=4th |publisher=Waveland Press [Long Grove, Illinois] |year=1997 |isbn=978-1577663812 |page=172}}</ref> As [[Adam Smith]]'s ''[[Wealth of Nations]]'' had during an earlier period, ''Principles'' came to dominate economics teaching. In the case of [[Oxford University]] it was the standard text until 1919, when it was replaced by [[Principles of Economics (Marshall)|Marshall's ''Principles of Economics'']].

==== Criticism ====
[[Karl Marx]], in his [[critique of political economy]], mentioned Mill in the ''[[Grundrisse]]''. Marx contended that Mill's thinking posited the categories of capital in an ahistorical fashion.<ref>{{cite web|last=Marx|title=Grundrisse|url=https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1857/grundrisse/ch01.htm|quote=The aim is, rather, to present production – see e.g. Mill – as distinct from distribution etc., as encased in eternal natural laws independent of history, at which opportunity bourgeois relations are then quietly smuggled in as the inviolable natural laws on which society in the abstract is founded. This is the more or less conscious purpose of the whole proceeding. In distribution, by contrast, humanity has allegedly permitted itself to be considerably more arbitrary. Quite apart from this crude tearing-apart of production and distribution and of their real relationship, it must be apparent from the outset that, no matter how differently distribution may have been arranged in different stages of social development, it must be possible here also, just as with production, to single out common characteristics, and just as possible to confound or to extinguish all historic differences under general human laws.}}</ref>

====Economic democracy and market socialism====
Mill's main objection to socialism focused on what he saw as its destruction of competition. He wrote, "[W]hile I agree and sympathize with socialists in this practical portion of their aims, I utterly dissent from the most conspicuous and vehement part of their teaching—their declamations against competition." Though he was an [[egalitarian]], Mill argued more for equal opportunity and placed meritocracy above all other ideals in this regard. He further argued that a socialist society would only be attainable through the provision of basic education for all, promoting [[economic democracy]] instead of [[capitalism]], in the manner of substituting capitalist businesses with [[worker cooperative]]s. He wrote:

{{blockquote|The form of association, however, which if mankind continue to improve, must be expected in the end to predominate, is not that which can exist between a capitalist as chief, and work-people without a voice in the management, but the association of the labourers themselves on terms of equality, collectively owning the capital with which they carry on their operations, and working under managers elected and removable by themselves.<ref>Principles of Political Economy with some of their Applications to Social Philosophy, IV.7.21 John Stuart Mill: Political Economy, IV.7.21</ref><ref>Principles of Political Economy and On Liberty, Chapter IV, Of the Limits to the Authority of Society Over the Individual</ref>}}

Mill's ideas led him to be classified as an early proponent of [[market socialism]] theory.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://mutualist.blogspot.com/2006/07/js-mill-market-socialist.html |title=J.S. Mill, Market Socialist |first=Kevin |last=Carson |date=16 July 2006 |work=Mutualist Blog: Free Market Anti-Capitalism |access-date=14 April 2025 |archive-date=6 March 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190306044351/http://mutualist.blogspot.com/2006/07/js-mill-market-socialist.html |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite web | last        = Capaldi | first       = Nicholas | date        = 2015-07-13 | title       = What Did Mill Understand as “Socialism”? | website     = Liberty Matters (Online Library of Liberty) | publisher   = Liberty Fund, Inc.
 | url         = https://oll.libertyfund.org/publications/liberty-matters/2015-07-13-what-did-mill-understand-as-socialism | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20241202064055/https://oll.libertyfund.org/publications/liberty-matters/2015-07-13-what-did-mill-understand-as-socialism | archive-date=2024-12-02 | access-date = 2025-04-19 | url-status  = live}}</ref><ref>{{cite web  |author=Matthew McManus  |date=26 April 2022  |title=The Socialist Sympathies of John Stuart Mill  |url=https://www.liberalcurrents.com/the-socialist-sympathies-of-john-stuart-mill/ 
 |website=Liberal Currents |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250317205149/https://www.liberalcurrents.com/the-socialist-sympathies-of-john-stuart-mill/  |archive-date=17 March 2025  |access-date=14 April 2025  |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>Manioudis, Manolis & Milonakis, Dimitris. (2024). An Early Anticipation of Market Socialism? Liberalism, Heresy, and Knowledge in John Stuart Mill’s Political Economy of Socialism. Science & Society, 88(3), 368-394.</ref>

====Political democracy====
Mill's major work on [[political democracy]], ''[[Considerations on Representative Government]]'', defends two fundamental principles: extensive participation by citizens and enlightened competence of rulers.<ref>{{cite book |last=Thompson |first=Dennis F. |title=John Stuart Mill and Representative Government |location=Princeton, NJ |publisher=Princeton University Press |year=1976 |isbn=978-0691021874 }}</ref> The two values are obviously in tension, and some readers have concluded that he is an [[Democratic elitism|elitist democrat]],<ref>{{cite book |last=Letwin |first=Shirley |title=The Pursuit of Certainty |location=Cambridge |publisher=Cambridge University Press |year=1965 |page=306 |isbn=978-0865971943 }}</ref> while others count him as an earlier [[Participatory democracy|participatory democrat]].<ref>{{cite book |last=Pateman |first=Carole |title=Participation and Democratic Theory |location=Cambridge |publisher=Cambridge University Press |year=1970 |page=28 |isbn=978-0521290043 }}</ref> In one section, he appears to defend a type of [[plural voting]] where more competent citizens are given extra votes (a view he later repudiated). However, in another chapter he argues cogently for the value of participation by all citizens. He believed that the incompetence of the masses could eventually be overcome if they were given a chance to take part in politics, especially at the local level.

Mill is one of the few [[political philosophers]] ever to serve in government as an elected official. In his three years in Parliament, he was more willing to compromise than the "radical" principles expressed in his writing would lead one to expect.<ref>{{cite book |last=Thompson |first=Dennis |title=J. S. Mill's Political Thought |publisher=Cambridge University Press |year=2007 |isbn=978-0521677561 |editor1-last=Urbinati |editor1-first=N. |location=Cambridge |pages=166–199 |chapter=Mill in Parliament: When Should a Philosopher Compromise? |editor2-last=Zakaras |editor2-first=A.}}</ref>

Mill was a major proponent of the diffusion and use of public education to the working class. He saw the value of the individual person, and believed that "man had the inherent capability of guiding his own destiny-but only if his faculties were developed and fulfilled", which could be achieved through education.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Davis |first1=Elynor G. |title=Mill, Socialism and the English Romantics: An Interpretation. |journal=Economica |date=1985 |volume=52 |issue=207 |pages=345–358 (351) |doi=10.2307/2553857 |jstor=2553857 }}</ref> He regarded education as a pathway to improve human nature which to him meant "to encourage, among other characteristics, diversity and originality, the energy of character, initiative, autonomy, intellectual cultivation, aesthetic sensibility, non-self-regarding interests, [[prudence]], responsibility, and [[self-control]]."<ref>{{cite journal |last1=de Mattos |first1=Laura Valladão |date=2000 |title=John Stuart Mill, Socialism, and His Liberal Utopia: An Application of His View of Social Institutions |journal=History of Economic Ideas |volume=8 |issue=2 |pages=95–120 |jstor=23722559}}</ref> Education allowed for humans to develop into full informed citizens that had the tools to improve their condition and make fully informed electoral decisions. The power of education lay in its ability to serve as a great equalizer among the classes allowing the working class the ability to control their own destiny and compete with the upper classes. Mill recognised the paramount importance of public education in avoiding the tyranny of the majority by ensuring that all the voters and political participants were fully developed individuals. It was through education, he believed, that an individual could become a full participant within representative democracy.

In regards to higher education, Mill defended liberal education against contemporary arguments for models of higher education focused on religion or science. His 1867 St. Andrews Address called on elites educated in reformed universities to work towards education policy committed to liberal principles.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Ward |first1=Lee |title=John Stuart Mill on the Political Significance of Higher Education |journal=History of Education Quarterly |date=August 2023 |volume=63 |issue=3 |pages=336–356 |doi=10.1017/heq.2023.22|s2cid=260335019 |doi-access=free }}</ref>

====Theories of wealth and income distribution====
In ''[[Principles of Political Economy]]'', Mill offered an analysis of two economic phenomena often linked together: the laws of production and wealth and the modes of its distribution. Regarding the former, he believed that it was not possible to alter to laws of production, "the ultimate properties of matter and mind... only to employ these properties to bring about events we are interested."<ref>{{cite book |last1=Mill |first1=John Stuart |title=Principles of Political Economy |date=1885 |publisher=D. Appleton and Company |location=New York}}</ref> The modes of [[distribution of wealth]] is a matter of human institutions solely, starting with what Mill believed to be the primary and fundamental institution: Individual Property.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Jensen |first1=Hans |title=John Stuart Mill's Theories of Wealth and Income Distribution |journal=Review of Social Economy |date=December 2001 |volume=59 |issue=4 |pages=491–507|doi=10.1080/00346760110081599 |s2cid=145340813 }}</ref> He believed that all individuals must start on equal terms, with division of the instruments of production fairly among all members of society. Once each member has an equal amount of individual property, they must be left to their own exertion not to be interfered with by the state. Regarding [[Economic inequality|inequality of wealth]], Mill believed that it was the role of the government to establish both [[Social policy|social]] and [[economic policies]] that promote the equality of opportunity.

The government, according to Mill, should implement three tax policies to help alleviate poverty:<ref name="Ek&Tol">{{cite journal|last1=Ekelund|first1=Robert|last2=Tollison|first2=Robert|date=May 1976|title=The New Political Economy of J. S. Mill: Means to Social Justice|journal=The Canadian Journal of Economics|volume=9|issue=2|pages=213–231|doi=10.2307/134519|jstor=134519}}</ref>

# fairly assessed [[income tax]];
# an [[inheritance tax]]; and
# a [[Sumptuary law|policy to restrict sumptuary consumption]].

[[Inheritance]] of capital and wealth plays a large role in development of inequality, because it provides greater opportunity for those receiving the inheritance. Mill's solution to inequality of wealth brought about by inheritance was to implement a greater tax on inheritances, because he believed the most important authoritative function of the government is [[taxation]], and taxation judiciously implemented could promote equality.<ref name="Ek&Tol" />

====The environment====
In Book IV, chapter VI of ''[[Principles of Political Economy]]'': "Of the Stationary State",<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.efm.bris.ac.uk/het/mill/book4/bk4ch06|title=''The Principles of Political Economy'', Book 4, Chapter VI|access-date=9 March 2008|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150923234230/http://www.efm.bris.ac.uk/het/mill/book4/bk4ch06|archive-date=23 September 2015|url-status=dead}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last=Røpke |first=Inge |date=1 October 2004 |title=The Early History of Modern Ecological Economics |journal=Ecological Economics |volume=50 |issue=3–4 |pages=293–314 |doi=10.1016/j.ecolecon.2004.02.012|bibcode=2004EcoEc..50..293R }}</ref> Mill recognised wealth beyond the material and argued that the logical conclusion of unlimited growth was [[Environmental effects of economic growth|destruction of the environment]] and a reduced quality of life. He concluded that a [[Steady-state economy|stationary state]] could be preferable to unending [[economic growth]]:

<blockquote>I cannot, therefore, regard the stationary states of capital and wealth with the unaffected aversion so generally manifested towards it by political economists of the old school.</blockquote>

<blockquote>If the earth must lose that great portion of its pleasantness which it owes to things that the unlimited increase of wealth and population would extirpate from it, for the mere purpose of enabling it to support a larger, but not a better or a happier population, I sincerely hope, for the sake of posterity, that they will be content to be stationary, long before necessity compel them to it.</blockquote>

====Rate of profit====
According to Mill, the ultimate tendency in an economy is for the [[Tendency of the rate of profit to fall|rate of profit to decline]] due to diminishing returns in agriculture and increase in population at a [[Malthusianism|Malthusian rate]].<ref>{{cite book |last1=Mill |first1=John Stuart |title=Principles of Political Economy |page=25 |url=http://eet.pixel-online.org/files/etranslation/original/Mill,%20Principles%20of%20Political%20Economy.pdf |access-date=1 November 2016}}</ref>