What if On Liberty was published today?

I'm not reviewing JS Mill because I'm not a total idiot. But he did get me thinking.

Taylor and Mill, 19th century power couple

I recently listened to an episode of Origin Story, the brilliant podcast on the history of political ideas and figures by Ian Dunt and Dorian Lynsky. Dunt was explaining the extraordinary story of John Stuart Mill and Harriet Taylor, which ended in Taylor’s death a year before On Liberty. I then read On Liberty itself, which is an extraordinary piece of work, enhanced by knowing Mill’s backstory and grief. It is, for anyone who hasn’t come across it, a foundational text for the kind of liberal freedoms, of speech, assembly and action, that we enjoy in the modern world.

But towards the end of my reading of this not-very-easy book, I kept thinking what it would look like if published today- freedom is just as much in the public conversation as it has ever been, and public philosophers are, ahem, quite vocally engaged in the political climate. So, with my tongue at least partially in my cheek, I wanted to think at how the book would look today, and whether that tells us anything about our intellectual and publishing culture.

Here are the ways in which it would be different in 2024.

1. It would have a subtitle.

   Non-fiction can’t just have a title hinting at what it’s about, so you have to flip it over to confirm the topic- you need an explanatory sentence like “how all our freedoms are threathened, and what to do about it” or something dumb like that.

2. It would start with an anecdote. Mill doesn’t bother with flim-flam- he just gets on with laying out the argument in dense prose which is tricky only because the ideas are. A modern publisher would insist on an opening, humanising anecdote, almost certainly based in a coffee shop and related to someone being silenced.

3. The psychodrama subtext would (probably) be text. Some passages of the book read very differently if you know that he spent years in a loving relationship with Taylor which had to be kept secret because she was married and could not leave her husband. Mill’s anger at convention and restriction on relationships thus reads very differently when you know this. Of course in the 21st century, his relationship would have gone very differently, but it seems unlikely that he would entirely omit his own experience from these sections.

4. There would (I hope) be more on how power dynamics affect freedom.

   Mill comes from a place of enormous privilege, and wrote in an era before we understood so much about forms of oppression- even Das Kapital was a few years off. Quite what he would have made of the concept of a micro-aggression is anyone’s guess. So the passages where he considers how someone might have their freedom suppressed not by law but by custom or hierarchy would, I hope, be accompanied by passages detailing how certain forms of speech can themselves contribute to oppression. Mill, who was for his time a liberal in all senses, probably would have made that transition.

5. It would be a lot longer.

   My copy of On Liberty weighs in at a slim 167 pages- modern publishing generally demands that books are weightier, to justify the price tag, and thus so many non-fiction books that should be under 200 pages get padded out to 300+. I hope Mill would retain his condensed style, but still, I wouldn’t bet on him being able to resist the extra chapters. Speaking of…

6. There would be a whole chapter on social media.

   I think it’s important to note at this point that although he is very clear that the freedom to express oneself should be (almost) absolute, he doesn’t place on anyone a duty to listen to all opinions. In fact, while he is very happy for bad opinions to exist in the world, he does not exhort the reader to ‘engage’ with them. This would be misunderstood, especially by devotees of Musk’s Xitter, unless Mill added a chapter explaining that no, the fact that he is very happy that you are free to express your dumb view on women in politics does NOT mean he has to retweet you. Mill would be brilliant on Twitter though, let’s face it.

7. The quotes on the cover might be from problematic people.

   Even if Mill himself turns out to be as unproblematic as my fantasy version of him, he is undoubtedly an intellectual forebear of libertarian thinkers, and so libertarians would be delighted to jump onto this. Much as I admire On Liberty, a modern edition may well have quotes from Daniel Hannan, Jordan Peterson and even Elon ‘say anything as long as I like it’ Musk on the cover. And that’s not a comfortable thought.

8. It would be widely read and wildly misunderstood.

   I think a modern, easier to read and more personal On Liberty could be a massive hit. I think that Mill would write it with subtlety and sensitivity to the modern context, but I think his central thesis, that freedom should only be curtailed by harm to others, would still resonate, and people would ignore the nuance. Would Mill go on podcasts to try to explain himself? I’m not enough of a Mill-head to know.

9. Harriet Taylor would get a co-author credit.

   Mill’s dedication to her, which opens the book, not only makes it clear how much he loved her, but also how important she was to his work. Were their relationship to be less scandalous, and in less sexist times, she surely would have made the front cover.

   

I had 9 thoughts- I am sure there are more so why not comment or send me a message?

---

A music recommendation that’s not a solo female artist! Public Service Broadcasting have released an album about Amelia Earhart and it’s kinda wonderful.