Mill proceeds to argue at some length that a favourite scheme of some moderate reformers,for the representation of classes,could only lead to 'a motley aristocracy,'and then answers two objections.The first is that his scheme would lead to the abolition of the monarchy and the House of Lords.The reply is simple and significant.It would only lead to that result if a monarchy or a House of Lords were favourable to bad government.He does not inquire whether they are so in fact.The second objection is that the people do not understand their own interest,and to this his answer is more remarkable.If the doctrine be true,he says,we are in a 'deplorable'position:we have to choose between evils which will be designedly produced by those who have both the power to oppress and an interest in oppression;and the evils which will be accidentally produced by men who would act well if they recognised their own interests.19Now the first evil is in any case the worst,for it supposes an 'invariable'evil;while in the other case,men may at least act well by accident.A governing class,that is with interests separate from those of the government,must be bad.If the interests be identical,the government may be bad.It will be bad if ignorant,but ignorance is curable.Here he appeals for once to a historical case.The priesthood at the Reformation argued on behalf of their own power from the danger that the people would make a bad use of the Bible.The Bible should therefore be kept for the sacred caste.They had,Mill thinks,a stronger case in appearance than the Tories,and yet the effect of allowing the people to judge for themselves in religious matters has been productive of good effects 'to a degree which has totally altered the condition of human nature.'20Why should not the people be trusted to judge for themselves in politics?
This implies a doctrine which had great influence with the Utilitarians.
In the remarkable essay upon 'Education,'which is contained in the volume of reprints,Mill discusses the doctrine of Helvétius that all the differences between men are due to education.Without pronouncing positively upon the differences between individuals,Mill observes that,at any rate,the enormous difference between classes of men is wholly due to education.21He takes education,it must be observed,in the widest possible sense,as meaning what would now be called the whole action of the 'environment'upon the individual.This includes,as he shows at length,domestic education,all the vast influence exercised upon a child in his family,'technical education,'by which he means the ordinary school teaching,'social education,'that is the influences which we imbibe from the current opinions of our neighbours,and finally,'political education,'which he calls the 'keystone of the arch.'The means,he argues,by which the 'grand objects of desire may be attained,depend almost wholly upon the political machine.'22If that 'machine'be so constituted as to make the grand objects of desire the 'natural prizes of just and virtuous conduct'of high services to mankind and of the generous and amiable sentiments from which great endeavours in the service of mankind naturally proceed,it is natural to see diffused among mankind a generous ardour in the acquisition of those admirable qualities which prepare a man for admirable action,great intelligence,perfect self-command,and over-ruling benevolence.'The contrary will be the case where the political machine prompts to the flattery of a small ruling body.
This characteristic passage betrays an enthusiasm which really burned under Mill's stern outside.He confines himself habitually to the forms of severe logic,and scorns anything like an appeal to sentiment.The trammels of his scientific manner impede his utterance a little,even when he is speaking with unwonted fervour.
Yet the prosaic Utilitarian who has been laying down as a universal law that the strong will always plunder the weak,and that all rulers will reduce their subjects to abject slavery,is absolutely convinced,it seems,of the possibility of somehow transmuting selfishness into public spirit,justice,generosity,and devotion to truth.Equally characteristic is the faith in the 'political machine.'Mill speaks as if somebody had 'discovered'the representative system as Watt (more or less)discovered the steam engine;that to 'discover'the system is the same thing as to set it to work;and that,once at work,it will be omnipotent.He is not less certain that a good constitution will make men virtuous,than was Bentham that he could grind rogues honest by the Panopticon.The indefinite modifiability of character was the ground upon which the Utilitarians based their hopes of progress;and it was connected in their minds with the doctrine of which his essay upon education is a continuous application.The theory of 'association of ideas'appeared to him to be of the utmost importance in education and in politics,because it implied almost unlimited possibilities of moulding human kings to fit them for a new order.In politics this implied,as J.S.Mill says,23'unbounded confidence'in the influence of 'reason.'
Teach the people and let them vote freely,and everything would follow.
