John Stuart Mills Paternism And Paternalism

Paternalism

John Stuart Mills is wrong when it comes to his rejection of paternalism. Mills is taking a position that is in line with that of classical liberalism which in many ways is in opposition to paternalism. This ideology only acknowledges the individual and does not take in account the larger society. Many do not like to be told what is right when it deals with something that does not affect anyone but themselves. The issue with this is that individuals are part of something. They are part of a family, community, city and nation. The impact of those choices might be seen as insignificant and not have relevance outside of their own lives but it is a small picture view and forgets about the big picture. Mills is right that paternalism is taking away liberties but those liberties affect others in ways that a person might see. Society should act as a parent to its individuals because they could cause weakness or issues that go beyond the realm of one’s own household.
According to the harm principle that Mills seems to be a supporter of, hard drug bans are justifiable because drug usage does effect more than just the user in many ways. Most drug bans are in response to some perceived negative that the lawmakers saw and wanted to prevent or stop. There are times in history the reason for the ban was less than just but as a holistic perspective most of the time the substances caused problems that had very negative effects on communities. Many times, the purchase of the product comes from an illegitimate source. South American drug cartels and the Mexican cartels that many times transport the product across the border in the United States undermine the rule of law and public safety in those nations including the Unite...

... middle of paper ...

... not fundamentally different when looking at the larger perspective from banning drugs like cocaine. Cocaine addiction and the other issues in this essay are all issues that different groups of people say should be individual liberties but have real impact negatively on the society around them. The issues of paternalism is that could be abused and made into tyrannical regime as Mill fears but there is a large difference from telling a motorcycle rider to wear a helmet to telling people they cannot voice political opinion. The argument is guilty of the slippery slope fallacy. As long the system has stated rights that cannot be infringed like the constitution does the in the United States this that slide to tyranny should be prevented in a society that is rooted by the concept of rule of law. We do not just exist as individuals but also as parts of society.