Abstract
Mill’s status in the democratic family is contested. However, regardless of their conclusions, scholars have largely focused on and interpreted the tension between competence and participation in his thought as a way to determine Mill’s democratic credentials. This article argues for a different approach in thinking about Mill’s status as a democrat – that is, an approach that takes seriously his multifaceted conception of human flourishing – and it also argues that Mill is an ambivalent democrat because different dimensions of democracy corrupt and cultivate different aspects of human flourishing. By taking seriously Mill’s multifaceted notion of human flourishing and connecting it to specific dimensions of democracy, I argue, we obtain a richer and more accurate depiction of the relationship between Mill’s ethics and his politics.