Mill believes that one ruler would be the worst form of government. He also believes that democratic republic government would tyrannize the minority. However, does our government "tyrannize" the minority? Should the majority count more than the minority?.
A monarchy is viewed as evil because the nation can be under the control of an unqualified or possibly evil man. The leader of this nation could impose on anyone he wished, and had the freedom to run the nation as only he pleased. The main flaw with this government is the fact that the king wants to get richer. Therefore, he would pass laws in order to make the rich richer and the poor poorer. In the time when monarchy was the assumed government, the majority of people were poor. Therefore, he was tyrannizing the majority. The majority could do nothing to stop the nation from deteriorating.
Mill points out that a democratic republic government could tyrannize the minority. However, would this not be for the betterment of the country? If the majority are happy, then most of the country is happy. So what is wrong with keeping the majority happy? Nothing -- but if the cost of majority happiness is the minority liberty, there is a problem. No one's liberty should be taken away in a country founded upon liberty and freedom. Keeping the minority happy should not be the main concern of the government; keeping the majority happy for the benefit of the country should be the top priority.
