From the Richard A. Spinello, CyberEthics: Morality and Law in Cyberspace (6th or 7th edition) choose ONE of the case studies from the chapters below.
Chapter 5 (6th edition) “Regulating Internet Privacy” Case Studies: pp. 192 -197; or
Ch 5 (7th edition) “Privacy Rights and the Age of Surveillance)” Case Studies: pp. 194-200.
Chapter 6 “Securing the Electronic Frontier” Case Studies: pp. 226-229; or
Ch 6 (7th edition) “Securing the Digital Infrastructure” Case Studies: pp. 229-236.
Write a 3-5 pp. (750-1300 word) paper in which you formulate an analysis/argument that responds to the question prompts tied to the chosen case and includes additional research on the topic of focus at stake.
1-14) Sullivan claims that Mill acknowledged the brutality of the British, but continued to maintain that their presence would still lead to a better civilisation that valued individual liberty. (Sullivan 1983: 611) However, this seems very unlikely as clearly the people were not being nurtured as he intended. Therefore, since the local people are not being improved to the extent that they are ready to adopt the principle of individual liberty and Mill believes intervention is unacceptable if it did not lead to the improvement of the local people, based on his own view he should disapprove of, rather than support, British colonialism. It must also be highlighted that Mill does not consistently sustain his argument that colonialism leads to other societies valuing individual liberty. For example, in “Considerations on Representative Government” he merely talks of the prestige that colonialism brings to the colonising power and does not mention preparing the people for individual liberty through pedagogical coercion. (Mill 1963) (Ryan 2014: 11). It is possible that Mill’s opinions evolved over time to value the improvement of the local people, however this is unlikely given that “Considerations”, in which he talks of prestige, was published two years after “A Few Words on Non-Intervention” where he highlights how the colonised people must be improved. (Mill 2006: 259) His justification for colonialism in “Considerations” is therefore a great contradiction to his commitment to individual liberty. This suggests that his view that colonialism led to more individual liberty for the people was an idea rather than a definitive policy. (Isak 2007: 359-400). Mill’s justification that colonialism will nurture the people to adopt the principle of individual liberty also contradicts all his arguments for non-intervention in the case of a civilised nation; that liberty must be gained through an arduous struggle and that aid by a foreign power to obtain liberty has negative long term affects. Firstly, it could be argued that if an arduous struggle is the only way people can gain liberty, then how are the British going to artificially prepare the people for liberty? Secondly, there were examples of arduous struggles against British rule in India and yet Mill still supported British control over these people. For example, the Sepoy Mutiny in India in 1857-59 involved the majority of the population. (Ryan 2014: 1-14) To add to this great contradiction, the same year (1859) as the mutiny Mill even wrote in “A Few Words on Non-Intervention” about how people must be given self-rule if they fight for it. (Mill 2006: 262) Although Mill may argue that these “barbarians” are not yet civilised enough to know that they want this freedom, Hamburger questions how Mill is to judge who is ready to decide their own governance through individual liberty? (Ham>GET ANSWER