Comparing Mills Representative Government and Lockes...

Even though academic study has frequently engaged with the question as to what form of government is ideal and what should be the goal of the government , there cannot be one absolute answer to this question , not merely because there has been no consensus among the scholarly community but because these questions cannot be detached from the polities which will bear the implications of the answer. Hence , it is pertinent that they must be looked at in a particular context. Mill argues for a representative government where sovereignty is vested in the aggregate of the community while Locke advocates majoritarian rule where legislative is supreme, though he prescribes certain limitations on it, and is coupled with a powerful executive. At the†¦show more content†¦This , I believe will rob people of their right to decide for themselves what values they want to pursue and be in opposition with individual liberty, which Mill itself is a proponent . Hence, the government will work towards a predetermined goal but the way to go about it might result in promoting certain framework or ideologies which would result in the production of a homogenous people. Critics say that it gives the state unnecessary power and people must have a right to a democratic say in their government, even if their exercising of such rights leads to worse outcomes than might have been obtained. But it is often refuted that since the government will be truly representative, and people must have wisely chosen good representatives , all the policies that they advocate will be justified and supported. If we only talk public space this argument holds strong ground , but to improve the masses the government might have to step upon the private sphere of society which will inhibit individualism and might entice averse reactions. The state may even step outside its mandate and make give directions to other institutions like the education or healthcare systems which are privately administered , so that they follow a certain framework which the state thinks will better the people. The danger in this is that it might result in