A “Vexata Quaestio”? The Place of Democracy in J.S. Mill’s Political Economy

• In Event: Bentham and Mill on Democracy, Despotism, and Liberalism

Abstract

This paper argues that the full extent of Mill’s idea of democracy cannot be understood without considering Mill’s attempts to reconcile political economy with democracy. It has two overall goals.

First, this paper aims to cast a new light on the enduring scholarly debate on Mill’s democratic credentials. This debate stems from a tension between Mill’s principles of competence and participation: while Mill argues for the inclusion in democratic participation (e.g., his advocacy for universal suffrage), he also expresses his preference for the superior influence of the educated classes in parliamentary politics. In approaching this tension, scholars predominately refer to Mill’s self-proclaimed “mature” work, Considerations on Representative Government, where he offers inegalitarian schemas such as plural voting in favor of the educated classes. This paper suggests that such Considerations-centered approach to Mill’s democratic thought is unfruitful. It not only conflates Mill’s reflections on representative government and democracy but also neglects how the nineteenth-century debates on social reform, working-class activism, and political economy profoundly shaped Mill’s democratic thought.

Second, this paper demonstrates that Mill persistently appealed to democracy to foreground one important question (in his own words, a “vexata quaestio”): how to promote the common good in industrial economy? In Mill’s eyes, the answer lied in a successful alliance of political economy and democratic organization. Exploring Principles of Political Economy and his writings on Chartism and French philosophy, this paper shows that Mill offered democratic self-government in industrial relations as the best way to fight against class domination and imbue economy with public spirit. Mill argued that such democratic reorganization of industry would rest on the principles of political economy – i.e., principles that supplies visions for a future social stage in which industry is oriented toward the common good. It is with this hope that Mill advocated for co-operative production. Arguably, Mill’s attempts to blend political economy with democracy were not always successful. For example, he never confronted the problem of paternalism in the Malthusian overpopulation principle. Nonetheless, ultimately, Mill saw democratic ownership and control in industry as the logical end of social reform and progress.

Author

• Salih Emre Gercek, University of Connecticut