Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. The Self-Extinguishing Despot: Millian Democratization, or The Autophagous Autocrat.Yvonne Chiu & Robert S. Taylor - 2011 - Journal of Politics 73 (4):1239-50.
    Although there is no more iconic, stalwart, and eloquent defender of liberty and representative democracy than J.S. Mill, he sometimes endorses non-democratic forms of governance. This article explains the reasons behind this seeming aberration and shows that Mill actually has complex and nuanced views of the transition from non-democratic to democratic government, including the comprehensive and parallel material, cultural, institutional, and character reforms that must occur, and the mechanism by which they will be enacted. Namely, an enlightened despot must cultivate (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • John Stuart Mill and modern liberalism: A study in contrasts.Gregory Conti - 2021 - Constellations 28 (3):379-402.
    Constellations, Volume 28, Issue 3, Page 379-402, September 2021.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • J. S. Mill's Anti-Imperialist Defence of Empire.Tim Beaumont & Yuan Li - 2022 - Utilitas 34 (3):242-261.
    It is possible to distinguish between empire, as a form of political order, and imperialism, as a process of aggressive expansion. Mill's liberalism allows for a legitimate empire, in which a civilized state rules a less civilized foreign people paternalistically to prepare them for liberal democratic self-rule. However, it rejects paternalistic imperialism, in the sense of aggression designed to establish such an empire. Apparent textual evidence to the contrary really demonstrates Mill's commitment to three distinct theses: that imperialism may benefit (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Feyerabend, funding, and the freedom of science: the case of traditional Chinese medicine.Jamie Shaw - 2021 - European Journal for Philosophy of Science 11 (2):1-27.
    From the 1970s onwards, Feyerabend argues against the freedom of science. This will seem strange to some, as his epistemological anarchism is often taken to suggest that scientists should be free of even the most basic and obvious norms of science. His argument against the freedom of science is heavily influenced by his case study of the interference of Chinese communists in mainland China during the 1950s wherein the government forced local universities to continue researching traditional Chinese medicine rather than (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations