Undergraduate Paper about the difference between collective and individual rights based on the works of Karl Marx, Robert Mill, and Alexis de Tocqueville

1. Collective and Individual Rights (Marx, Mill, and Toqueville)
(INTRODUCTION; THESIS) Individual liberties and societal equality are both equally
paramount, but it’s also important to note that both have to have the same amount of focus because
ultimately, one cannot exist without the other.
Society is usually divided into different factions according to different characteristics that
associate with race, religion, gender, etc. Marx displays how society is divided according to
socioeconomic factors. The class structure that he describes has been existent since the Middle
Ages. This structure was arranged so that feudal lords were at the top followed by vassals, guild-
masters, journeymen, apprentices, and then serfs. Class structure evolved since then to the point
when, according to Marx, there were only two prevalent classes standing: the Bourgeoisie and the
Proletariat.
The rise of the modern Bourgeoisie came as a result of the rise of the Industrial Revolution.
Industrial millionaires replaced the industrial middle class from the medieval structure, and these
millionaires gained significant political sway. The Bourgeoisie is characterized solely by self-
interest, and therefore use their political sway for their own political gain. The Bourgeoisie’s rise
to power gave way to all kinds of societal changes. Personal worth became measured by the
amount of money one had instead of personal ethics or values. The Bourgeoisie had also changed
the value of occupations; all occupations became wage-laboring professions and obtaining a job
became a competition.
The changes in the work force affected the second class that Marx talks about, the
Proletariat. As a result of the industrial world created by the Bourgeoisie, the workers live only as
long as they can find work. They depend on the capital that they gain from their labor to provide
for themselves and their families. The Bourgeoisie exploits this need for work for their own

2. personal gain. Because the value of the members of the Bourgeoisie class is determined by the
their monetary value, they did everything in their power to increase their capital and curb the
amount of money they spend on the factories and labor they own. They paid their workers as little
as possible and forced them to work in terrible and stifling conditions. They forced them to work
long hours with no breaks so that their manufacture rate, and profit, increased.
The exploitation of a group of people is why it is necessary to protect collective rights and
strive towards equality. There are several cases in which certain groups have their rights infringed
upon by other members of society. After the emergence of Protestantism in the 1600s, the Catholic
majority constantly persecuted those who practiced the Protestant belief. Freedom of religion is
considered to be a collective right because it affects a large group of individuals. If this freedom
is not protected, then either people will only be allowed to practice one religion or no religion at
all. As seen with the Protestants, persecution of a certain religious group can lead to terrible
inhumane acts of violence.
In Marx’s case, it is the working class that is suffering the violation of their basic rights to
a good living wage and appropriate working conditions. While presenting his Communist
ideology, Marx states that, “The immediate aim of the Communists is the same as that of all the
other proletariat parties: formation of the proletariat into a class, the overthrow of the bourgeois
supremacy, conquest of political power by the proletariat” (Marx 22). Similar to religious
persecution, the exploitation of a certain class can lead to tremendous consequences. In Marx’s
words, the exploitation and lack of protection of the working class and their rights could lead to a
revolution that could turn out massive in scope and bloody in scale.
Marx’s perspective leads one to believe in the immense importance of collective rights.
However, as important as collective rights are they do not triumph over individual rights. There

3. are several liberties outlined by other philosophers and the Constitution that are essential to the
individual. In On Liberty, Mill specifically refers to the freedom of opinion and expression.
Freedom of expression is an individual right that must be protected. According to Mill, it would
be wrong to silence someone who held a particular opinion because it robs “the human race,
posterity as well as the existing generation” (Mill 14).
Mill states in his work that, “If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one
person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one
person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind” (Mill 14). Silencing
an individual’s opinion is wrong for several reasons. For one, the suppressed opinion may be true,
and by discovering something true the person may have performed a great service to his or her
society. After all, dissenting opinions are often times the leading causes of great revolutions such
as the American or French Revolutions. They are also the reasons why important works about the
political and social components in society such as The Communist Manifesto exist in the first place.
Opinions must differ and be debated upon because otherwise the meaning of the “ruling” opinion
may be lost. For example, when religious beliefs stop being challenged they lose their “living
power”. People will not truly understand the doctrines they believe in which can lead to some
serious mistakes.
Mill not only stresses the importance of individual opinions, but also of the contents of
these opinions. He states, … (BLOCK QUOTE) … Simply put, the more eccentric the opinion the
better. The amount of eccentricity of an opinion displays the amount of individual thinking that is
encouraged in a society. If an eccentric opinion is freely expressed, it reflects on the genius and
mental vigor that the society in which the opinion exists. However, if eccentric opinions are not
encouraged in a society, then it mirrors the values that this society does and doesn’t encourage.

4. In many regimes, freedom of opinion and expression is repressed to the point where no one
can express any dissenting opinion. Regimes like these are usually despotic and authoritarian in
nature. They are often times the regimes that have the most problems with religious persecution
and wealth inequality among their socioeconomic classes. Therefore, reducing limits on freedom
of expression can lead to great progress in human society. Most of the time it’s difficult for the
truth to triumph over persecution. For instance, the reformation of the Catholic Church was put
down twenty times before Martin Luther was successful. In The Communist Manifesto, Marx’s
revolution of the Proletariat can only be made possible by the expression of opinion over the
oppression of the working class.
Contributing complete focus and protection to either collective rights or individual rights
is a tempting idea. When collective rights are completely protected it creates equality amongst the
people. When individual rights are protected it allows for increased free expression. However,
there is a flaw in this type of thinking. In his book Democracy in America, Tocqueville talks about
equality and personal freedoms. As much as he champions equality in society, he acknowledges
that, “…men may not become absolutely equal without being wholly free” (Tocqueville 584s).
Equality has both a positive connotation and a negative connotation. In the positive sense, equality
refers to equal liberties among the people. In the negative sense, however, it refers to uniformity.
In a society where everyone is equal at the expense of their personal liberties, there are no diverse
thoughts and ideas because freedoms such as expression and religion are suppressed.
The balance of equality and individual freedoms is especially important in democratic
societies. Tocqueville states that, “...democratic communities have a natural taste for freedom: left
to themselves, they will seek it, cherish it, and view any privation of it with regret. But for equality,
their passion is ardent, insatiable, incessant, invincible: they call for equality in freedom; and if

5. they cannot obtain that, they still call for equality in slavery” (Tocqueville 587). People living in
democratic societies will attempt to achieve equality in liberty with great strides. This is why it’s
important for people to be the same in some ways and in other cases be completely different.
Tocqueville writes that the formation of institutions is crucial to society, and religion is an example
of such institutions. Being a member of different institutions is important because it allows for the
circulation of new thoughts and ideas. This in turn contributes to the influence that individual rights
can have over collective rights, such as freedom of religion.
However, in a society where both individual and collective rights exist, both require limits.
Collective rights should be protected but limited to the point where they don’t interfere with the
rights of another group or individual liberties. While industrial tycoons should be allowed to pursue
to profit it should not be so unlimited that it could infringe on the rights of their workers. At the
same time, individuals are not completely isolated from society, and therefore certain conduct is
required in return for the protection of society. While individual actions and expression should be
encouraged, both must be limited when they harm others. In these cases, legal persecution of
opinions is allowed because it protects the safety of the majority while still maintaining the
protection of the individual right.
Collective and individual rights are both paramount to the function of society. Collective
rights protect a certain group from being targeted and oppressed, while individual rights protect
each and every member of society. There is no sense in focusing on just one concept, because
ultimately one cannot exist without the other. Individual rights encourage the spread of ideas that
influence and protect collective rights while collective rights place limits on individual liberties to
prevent any harm they may cause to others. The ultimate goal of a society is to make sure that
every group and individual has an equality of liberties.