Question

Marx and Mill both thought that there were historical forces blocking the full development of human freedom. How are their views of freedom (and secondarily history) different? What do Marx and Mill want people to be free from? What did each thinker think that freedom was for? You can refer more to Marx in the answer if you prefer.

Answer 1

MARX and MILL’s view of freedom

                                    Both Marx and Mill were strong believers of freedom and believed that human beings are capable of making progress and the concept of freedom is an end in itself. Thus, both saw freedom as a means to realise the individual potential and self- determination. But in the concept of freedom realisation and the impediments to freedom, both have some different approaches.

                                    For Marx, progress is demonstrated through his account of historical materialism, which is believed to place some changes on the economic system as the basis for changes in the superstructure of the economy. He believed that the changes are determined by technological transformations, for which he states the condition where the feudalism was replaced by capitalism after the phase of Industrial Revolution, resulting in bourgeoisie and proletariat classes. Marx also firmly emphasises that mankind has the power to drive transformation and attain progress as the mankind remains the only common entity among all the transformations. Marx always believed that freedom should never revolve around individualism, but rather should focus on the society as a whole. He believed that focus on individual freedom would rather consider human being as an ‘isolated monad’.

                                    Mill, also acknowledges that the progress is possible. But rather than focussing on transformation, Mill sees the approach as rather towards the attainment of liberalism. He states the development of religious toleration among the European market as an example for this. In the political front, he sees the concept of decentralisation of power from individuals to masses as a foundation for the transformation which has indeed lead from the constitutionalism to representative democracy over the period. He states that the truth, ie liberalism is inevitable in the historical progress.

                                    There are some considerable differences between both theories of freedom. Marx conceives freedom as a development of human capacity through non-instrumental labour, as he believes that the instrumental labour always focus on maximising the efficiency and not developing the creativeness of people. He states that mankind can be free from the alienation of capitalism by enhancing non-instrumental labour as an end in itself. But Mills’ freedom focuses on the absence of coercion, the legal coercion ad social coercion. He states that freedom entails living in the absence of coercion, on freedom of expression, association and action. Although both differs in the way they discover freedom, both are of the belief that freedom is an end in itself. On detailed analysis, there is also a strange contrast that Mill believes that freedom is the necessity factor of progress whereas Marx believes that struggle against the impediment is necessary for achieving freedom.

                                    Thus although there are strange contrasts between the way freedom is defined, both share some common attachments also which forms the backbone in achieving freedom.