Tyranny Of Majority
Tyranny of Majority
Tyranny of Majority refers to the belief in which the majority of society or a group agrees upon an action which does not incisively mean that, that opinion is correct. I believe that this occurs more in a democratic government than anywhere else, we as a country elect our representatives to exercise their opinion or rule on what are best benefits for the majority of the country. The great issue about leaving the decision to the majority is that eventually it could fail by driving the minorities into despair. This implies that eventually if the majority ignores the demands of the minorities it will cause chaos within the country.
Mill’s principle indicates that the government should not be able to take total control against an individual’s will unless their action has violated another’s individual’s right. Upon violating the rights of another individual the violator can face moral reprobation for breaking the commitment. “The only freedom which deserves the name is that of pursuing our own good in our own way, so long we do not attempt to deprive others of theirs, or impede their efforts to obtain it. Each is the proper guardian of his own health, whether bodily, or mental or spiritual. Mankind is greater gainers by suffering each other to live as seems good to them, than by compelling each to live as seems good to the rest.” By pursuing their own way of life and not impeding with the way of another individual it falls into the definition of freedom according to Mill’s principle. Mill criticizes about a majority Muslims wanting and insisting that pork should not be eaten and must be banned from their country, which is a small claim that he uses to get to the bigger issue of banning polygamy. Polygamy is the state of marriage to many spouses or a marriage that includes more than two spouses and is punished in Spain. Mill’s principle state that people may speak up against those actions and take a stab at trying to change their opinions
Tyranny of Majority refers to the belief in which the majority of society or a group agrees upon an action which does not incisively mean that, that opinion is correct. I believe that this occurs more in a democratic government than anywhere else, we as a country elect our representatives to exercise their opinion or rule on what are best benefits for the majority of the country. The great issue about leaving the decision to the majority is that eventually it could fail by driving the minorities into despair. This implies that eventually if the majority ignores the demands of the minorities it will cause chaos within the country.
Mill’s principle indicates that the government should not be able to take total control against an individual’s will unless their action has violated another’s individual’s right. Upon violating the rights of another individual the violator can face moral reprobation for breaking the commitment. “The only freedom which deserves the name is that of pursuing our own good in our own way, so long we do not attempt to deprive others of theirs, or impede their efforts to obtain it. Each is the proper guardian of his own health, whether bodily, or mental or spiritual. Mankind is greater gainers by suffering each other to live as seems good to them, than by compelling each to live as seems good to the rest.” By pursuing their own way of life and not impeding with the way of another individual it falls into the definition of freedom according to Mill’s principle. Mill criticizes about a majority Muslims wanting and insisting that pork should not be eaten and must be banned from their country, which is a small claim that he uses to get to the bigger issue of banning polygamy. Polygamy is the state of marriage to many spouses or a marriage that includes more than two spouses and is punished in Spain. Mill’s principle state that people may speak up against those actions and take a stab at trying to change their opinions