Alexis De Tocqueville’s Democracy in America
delves deep into how the
American States and the federal government would grow
politically and
socially under the umbrella of democracy. He sees the United
States as a
unique entity because of how and why it started as well as its
geographical
location.
De Tocqueville explains that the foundations of the
democratic
process in America are completely different from anywhere else on
the globe.
The land was virginal and the colonies had almost complete sovereignty
from
England from the very beginning because they were separated by an ocean
and
financial troubles. The people who came to America were the oppressed
and
unhappy in England and all were trying to find a place where they could
start anew and create a political structure that would facilitate an
individual
freedom unlike anything that they had previously experienced in
Europe. De
Tocqueville believed that the nature of democracy in the New
World rested within
the fact that all of the emigrants were basically from
the same social strata,
resulting in the first new country where there was
no preliminary basis for
an aristocracy. "Land is the basis of an
aristocracy…and… [in America] when
the ground was prepared, its produce was
found to be insufficient to enrich
a proprietor and a farmer at the same t
ime(41)." He saw that even the soil
of America was opposed to the
structure of an aristocracy.
There
were also outside influences
lending unvoiced support for the creation of this
new democracy. Being an
ocean apart from its mother country, who at this time
did not have the
financial reserves to oversee its colonies, let the Americans
govern
themselves. If they had not had this sovereignty at the beginning America
might have become something completely different than it is today, but that
was not the case, so these emigrants now had a fertile place to plant their
ideas of a country founded upon the many ideas of the Enlightenment. Another
large influence was the lack of neighbors. America had no worries of
guarding
and protecting its borders because there was not anyone there who
could pose
a threat. They could put all of their energies toward the
creation of their
democracy.
This democratic nation was to have no
aristocracy and only one
major division between its people: the North and
the South. De Tocqueville
saw two very different attitudes in these regions.
The North and the South
had conflicting views as to how they were going to
advance themselves in the
economic and political arenas. But the
introduction of slavery into labor
was the major conflict between the two.
"Slavery…dishonors labor; it introduces
idleness into a society, and with
idleness, ignorance and pride, luxury and
distress…The influence of slavery,
united to the English character, explains
the manners and the social
condition of the Southern States(42)." With the
advent of slavery, the South
was creating a class system amongst themselves
that would not exist in the
other regions of the States. The few Southern
founders were granted
huge amounts of land with which to work, and instead
of diving into the land
themselves like the northerners did with their smaller
pieces of land. They
instead bought slaves and would eventually divide the
country in a nasty
dispute over their handling of affairs.
He realized that
the majority of
the influences over public policy were the men in the North.
They created
the first public school system that was to be readily accessible
to the
majority of the people. The enlightened idea that every man should
have
access to knowledge was given exercise in this new nation, creating a
highly
learned society, but one that is not very intellectual. Schools teach
specialized skills so that American can enter the work force as soon as
possible,
but gloss over any areas that have no value in work. Whereas in
England, the
few who do go on towards a higher education are actually being
challenged and
forced to expand their minds, higher education in America is
available to many,
but it is more specialized and very basic. This unlimited
quantity, limited
quality relationship is seem by de Tocqueville as an
inherent part of a democratic
society. This is because, "…there is no
class…in which the taste for intellectual
pleasures is transmitted with
hereditary fortune and leisure
and [wherein]
…intellect [is] held in
honor(53)."
Democracy is a facilitator of a blended
society. The masses
will be very similar in their thinking as well as their
actions. America is
a social democracy because the citizens are united by
their beliefs and
movements as
well as their political organization
and its laws. "In
no country, in world does the law hold so absolute a language
as it does in
America; and in no country is the right of applying it vested
in so many
hands(63)." Americans give up the idea of complete personal freedom
so that
they can obtain and preserve a civil society in which they can live.
A
centralized government is one that controls all interests that are common
amongst the nation, whereas a centralized administration deals with the
interests
of a small area or community. "These two kinds of centralization
mutually
assist and attract each other; but they must not be supposed to be
inseparable(63)."
De Tocqueville sees America as having no real centralized
administration but
a supreme system of centralized government. This is
states because America
only has one legislature in each State that reigns.
He sees this as a great
strength as well as its weakest point. Where ever
there is a government that
changes power so quickly do to its "subord
inat[ion] to the power of the people(65)"
will be susceptible to its
"vigor." The States will be most likely torn apart
by their vehemence and
not apathy.
In the 1830’s, many of the citizens
were very interested in
every turn that this budding country took in the political
arena. They saw
criminals as a personal affront and society shunned all who
dared to break
the peace. Now, with millions of people who live from the Atlantic
to the
Pacific, many views of American politics have changed. Instead of enthusiasm,
apathy has taken over many people. Presidential elections have to most
turn-outs,
but
those still do not have 50% turn-out rates. Laziness
has
taken over present day America and the society is really hurting because
of
it. Crime is rampant and no one seems to care if justice or punishment is
served or not. Many are very disillusioned with the government and think it
is easier to do nothing than to become involved and try to change it. This
is in direct relation to de Tocqueville’s notion that democracies have a
tendency
to lose liberty and personal interest as the country grows larger.
Not only
with more people are there bound to be more differing ideas, but
more people
who share them, creating more voiced dissonance in the political
sphere.
This
dissonance is glossed over when still in the minority.
"[T]he tyranny of the
majority" is one of de Tocqueville’s main concerns
with democratic nations.
When a government is run and hindered by the
thoughts of the majority, where
do the ideas of the minority fit? When in
elections only 45% of the population
votes, and who elects representatives,
how is the majority of the country really
represented? The original thought
behind the majority was that the consensus
of many would be more informed
and intelligent than of a few. But looking
upon the uninformed voting habits
of the public today, is that still the case?
De Tocqueville sees the problem
of an oppressive majority and it seems to
have come to light in the last few
decades. He views the majority not as
an entity unto itself, but as a
conglomeration of single men who might have
aspirations other than the
betterment of society. If a lone man has the ability
to misuse power, what
changes if a majority has the ability to
misuse as well? "Thought is
an invisible and subtle power, that mocks all
efforts of tyranny(116)."
Since America is founded upon education that lacks
thought, Americans are
facilitating oppressive powers from the very place they
are trying to
facilitate freedom and liberty. Original American concepts of
democracy are
falling to the wayside, hypocrisy and apathy are taking its place,
creating
an even more fertile ground for the majority to gain more power than
it
already has. If not careful, the majority will soon be speaking for a very
select group, while the masses will be left out, creating a despotic
government
of the past to take over what is now one of the greatest
democracies of the
era.
In response to Hofstadter’s theory on
anti-intellectualism, De Tocqueville’s
vision of American education, or lack
there of, again comes into play. It
is not in the nature of America to
strive for excellence. For to do so would
be to draw oneself out of the
masses, creating a feeling of distrust and suspicion
that would envelop them
wherever they went. In order to feel a common bond
with ones' peers,
intellectualism is not the route to take. So as to not
alienate oneself, one
must be content to merely be average. Mass media knows
this; television was
not created to promote education, it was and is used as
an "opiate for the
masses," as Karl Marx once said about anything that would
keep people’s
minds off what could potentially be revolutionary ideas. Lives
kept mundane
and boring are not a threat to the development and movement of
a nation. The
contradictions in American
values are amazing.
Liberty is canonized,
yet Americans will give it up so easily if enticed,
which is not difficult.
Yet, there is still some element that has kept the
country together and away
from the tendency to convert from democratic means
to other, more easily
managed ways of govern. This element is adaptable from
person to person.
Many are content with the government as it is, as long
as they can go about
their lives without interference. Others will whole-heartedly
take it as a
personal mission to enter into politics and change the world for
the better.
Whatever the case may be, people are easily led away from what
is really
important to the lasting of a society, and take their lives on a
tangent
route that may leave them satisfied with their mediocre accomplishments,
but
might eventually kill off any real progress towards excellence in any
genre
of society, even if for the time being, it feels that as a nation, America
is content with itself.
De Tocqueville’s ideas of the effects of
democracy
on feelings and gender roles are very enlightening. He sees the
lack of class
distinctions as to why Americans are immediately friendly with
one another.
Since no one person is better than the next, there is no
premise for suspicion
of one another. Americans are unaccustomed to a rigid
etiquette, so they are
less easily upset by a slight from another person.
Amiable to the end, they
will most likely let minor things blow over, and
they will be hard to provoke
with breaches in decorum. Americans are very
good-natured for the most part,
and this trait will always make them
a little apart from the
rest of the Western societies.
De Tocqueville
sees women in America as extremely
different from the women in Europe. "…and
she is remarkable rather for purity
of manners than for chastity of
mind(234)." He sees American women as worldly
and unaffected by the European
naiveté and ignorance. He sees the influence
of democracy in every action of
a female. She has none of the rigid social
restraints of the Europeans, and
in so, needs to know how to combat her passions
herself and not rely on
society to do it for her. American women are self-assured
and strong of
opinion. They have an innate ability to be strong and independent
while
still respectful of their husbands and fathers. Religion helps in maintaining
constraints on the female population, but democratic societies hold the
woman
responsible for herself.
De Tocqueville has left no aspect of
American society
out of his publication. He rips the American body open and
examines all the
things that are inside right down to the bare bones. It is
a little scary
to read of ones’ own nation and its culture. To realize that
one’s own life
is not how he made it, but of how his ancestors have created
society. Whether
it be as to how Americans view their politics, or their
social afflictions,
de Tocqueville voices his opinions as to what is
commendable, are conversely,
what is wrong with every aspect of America. He
sees America through the eyes
of intelligent outsider who has no reason to
make America sound anything
other
than it is. He has done a very
thorough job, and his vision of nineteenth
century America will surely help
lead America into the twenty-first century
with a better definition of
itself.