Must-read classics selected by Harvard, Oxford, and Seoul National University
"On Liberty" is a book that perfectly suits the spirit of today's times!

John Stuart Mill's masterpiece, On Liberty, is still a much-loved book even 150 years after its publication.
No, as time goes by, it is loved more and more, and the value of this book shines brighter and brighter.
This book deals with the relationship between citizens and the state, that is, to what extent civil liberties are guaranteed and to what extent state intervention can extend.
The author, Mill, says:
“Individual freedom is absolute to the extent that one’s thoughts, words, and actions do not harm others.
“Neither the laws of the state nor the general moral judgments may restrict the liberty of the individual.”

To summarize Mill's argument, it is as follows.
As citizens, individuals have unlimited freedom.
But only as long as it doesn't harm others.
The state must not restrict such individual freedom.
However, the state may interfere with an individual's freedom when the individual harms another.
And the state must play a role in encouraging the activities and capabilities of individuals and groups.
However, when the state does not properly perform its role or when the state oppresses individuals for its own purposes, the state's role should be reduced and its interference with individuals should be limited.

In our society today, voices advocating for individual freedom and autonomy are growing louder.
And there is a growing rejection of state interference and suppression of individual freedom.
“On Liberty” is a book that fits our situation perfectly.
This book is bound to be greatly loved today because it speaks on our behalf to the nation and advocates for individual freedom and rights.

Rulers must be held effectively accountable to the people, and the people must be able to oust their rulers at any time.
If the people could determine all matters concerning the use of power, they could safely leave it to the rulers.
Their power is the power of the people themselves, but it has simply been concentrated and entrusted to them for their convenience.
--- p.35

The tyranny of the majority, like all other tyrannies, was first exercised through the exercise of public power, and is still feared by people today.
But those who have pondered this matter deeply will know that when society itself becomes a tyranny, that is, when society collectively exercises tyranny over its individual members, the means of that tyranny are not limited to those carried out by the hands of politicians.
Society can and does enforce its own commands.
But when society issues commands that are wrong and erroneous, or commands that concern matters in which it should not interfere, the resulting tyranny becomes more terrible and terrifying than any kind of political oppression.
This tyranny, unlike political oppression, does not usually involve extreme punishments, but it penetrates so deeply into every sphere of an individual's life that it enslaves the very soul of the individual, leaving little avenue for escape.
--- p.37~38

In fact, there are no recognized principles that can be used to objectively determine whether government interference with individuals is appropriate or inappropriate.
People make decisions based on their personal preferences.
Some people advocate for government intervention when they believe it will produce good results or correct social ills.
Some people would rather tolerate some social evils than have one more area of ​​human life subject to government control.
--- p.46

Only the freedom to pursue our own interests in our own way deserves to be called freedom.
Whether physical, mental, or spiritual, the person who can best take care of his or her health is himself or herself.
It is more beneficial to humanity to allow individuals to live lives that seem beneficial to themselves than to force individuals to live lives that seem beneficial to humanity.
--- p.53

If all mankind except one person holds the same opinion, and only one person holds the opposite opinion, it is no more justifiable to silence that one person by force than it is for one person in power to silence all mankind by force.
--- p.59

Even if a majority believes that one view is superior to the other and should not only be tolerated but actively encouraged and supported, that view may very well become a minority view at another time and place.
Because, if either opinion is not treated fairly and thus neglects or leaves deficiencies in human interests and welfare, the opinion representing that part will emerge as the dominant opinion for a period of time.
--- p.120

If all the people in the world have the same opinion on some matter, but only a few people have a different opinion, even if the majority opinion is correct, it is almost always true that there is something useful in the opinion of those few people that the world should hear.
Therefore, if that minority remains silent, humanity will lose some of the truth.
--- p.120~121

Among the human mental faculties, the ability to accurately judge the truth and error in a certain matter is extremely rare, and each person can represent only one part of the truth. Therefore, unless there are people who assert various opinions containing different parts of the truth and an environment is created in which each part of the truth is heard, there is no possibility for people to arrive at the truth.
--- p.128

Until human beings have developed their capacities to a degree greater than they do now, and are able to perceive all parts of the truth, rather than clinging to only one part of it as they do now, any agreement of opinion that is not the result of a complete and free comparison and discussion of opposing opinions is undesirable, and a diversity of opinions is not detrimental but beneficial to human society and to individuals.
These principles apply not only to people's opinions but also to their actions.
--- p.135~136

For each person's nature to flourish, it is essential to allow different people to live different lives.
The higher the standard of living allowed for individuals in an era, the more likely it was that the era would leave a distinct mark on human history and attract the attention of future generations.
--- p.150

On the one hand, today's concept of freedom operates in a way that too casually violates the individual's freedom, which should be thoroughly guaranteed in matters that concern only the individual.
On the other hand, if individuals are left to their own devices regarding certain actions, not only will the lives of their children become miserable and depraved, but the state should intervene and regulate them to prevent harm to those who are significantly affected by such actions. However, the state is working to deny and reject such intervention.
--- p.241

But I believe that the practical principle that guarantees safety, the ideal that must always be kept in mind, and the standard by which all measures to overcome difficulties must be tested can be expressed in these words: “Decentralize power to the greatest extent possible, within the limits of efficiency.
But, if possible, concentrate the information in one place and distribute it from there.”

--- p.251