De Tocqueville:

 French aristocrat; felt that democracy was an exotic, new political option
 Thought democracy was going to be the future of the world
 “Democracy in America” highlights the darker sides of democracy
 Not anti-American or anti-Democratic (thought democracy to be irresistible and
inevitable)
 Believed that there is a price to pay (a price that one should be willing to pay when
one gives ultimate authority to everyone)
 If there is no large issue e.g. war, people tend to concentrate efforts on making a fairer
show for the wishes of the people i.e. questioning mechanisms of democracy,
preventing power-hungry people from getting into power, etc.
 The equality of condition is the fundamental fact for democracy.
 Democracy appears to be spreading, it appears to be a tendency for Christian societies
that nobles fall in power as the lower classes rise.
 Democracy appears to be a strong but amendable force (for the time being)
 We must educate the democracy in order to make it adaptable
Power
 People are corrupted not by power or obedience, but by illegitimate power
 The distinctions of rank are falling away as the State becomes more egalitarian
 Impulses of the state would be regulated, but not completely removed.
 There will be less great people, but the average person will have a greater degree of
benefits. (goes back to how America has a “middling force”)
What is democracy?
 In aristocratic societies, the mass is sacrificed to the individual, many are sacrificed
for the few. In democracies, the government should be active and powerful, with the
people only seeking to stop governmental abuse of power.
 In aristocratic societies, the power is still divided amongst individual members of the
aristocracy. The government cannot carry out everything it wishes to – such is the
power of the individual freedom.
 In democratic societies, elections of a provincial assembly are held, and this ensures
the independence of the public office vs. the government, even more than hereditary
offices in aristocratic societies.
 In binding together, democratic masses may obtain as much wealth and power as the
old aristocracy. Hence, they may attain the benefits of aristocracy without its
attendant harms.
 In aristocracy you are close to your fellow citizens.
 In democracy you do not have the strong ties between fellow citizens. You can appeal
to the whole nation, or of mankind, but to do that you need the press. Hence, the
freedom of press is important. It is the only cure for the evils of equality.
 Equality deprives one of ties; the press allows him to summon his fellow countrymen
or men to his assistance
Democracy and materialism
 In France, making money did not appear at the forefront of people’s minds—the poor
had no chance of acquiring wealth, and the wealthy felt no need to expand their
wealth
 Money not the way to judge a life→the Americans Tocqueville met on his journeys
constantly thought that through hard work one was able to make a fortune (this is
good and admirable)
 Money seemed to be the only achievement Americans respected; the only test of
goodness of something was how much money it made
 Democracy and capitalism created an equitable but also flat and oppressive way for
humans to judge each other
Democracy and Envy
 High expectations versus dissatisfaction at current state
 Equality makes people believe that they can achieve anything
 However, this is only an illusion; in an unequal society, outstanding people go
unnoticed, but in a level society like a democracy, outstanding people are envied (this
leads to melancholy haunting inhabitants of democracy even in the midst of
abundance)
 Even though the old, rigid hierarchal European society has its flaws, it rarely breeds
envy and shame because it gave individuals in the lower rungs the freedom not to see
the achievements of others in society as reference points (and find themselves
desperately wanting in status and importance as a result)
Tyranny of the majority
 Usually tyranny opposite of democracy
 However, de Tocqueville argued that democracy spawns a new kind of tyranny—
tyranny of the majority
 Democratic culture often end up “demonizing” any assertion of difference, especially
in cultural superiority
 Society obtains an aggressive leveling instinct
 Considered civic virtue to cut down anyone who seems to be getting above and to cut
them viciously down to size
 “The surface of American society is covered with a layer of democratic pain, but from
time to time one can see the old aristocratic colors breaking through”
Democracy versus Authority
 De Tocqueville saw that Americans refused to believe that anyone could be better
than them (despite certain certifications)
 Reluctance to defer to people too easily led to an unhelpful refusal to accept any kind
of submission at all (despite the fact that some people in society truly are wiser and
more qualified)
 Democracy was fatally biased towards mediocrity
Democracy undermines freedom of the mind
  Democracy to encourage individuals to have an open mind?→Tocqueville disagreed
 Tocqueville believed that one could find few places with less independence of the
mind and true freedom of discussion than in America
 Because Americans put too much trust in their “fair and just” system, they simply
gave up on critical thinking and put their faith in newspapers, and so called common
sense instead
 Americans also were afraid of insulting their neighbors (who could be potential
customers)
 Americans found it better to trot out clichés than to be original (and potentially
problematic)
 “A middling standard has been established in America for all human knowledge. All
minds come near to it, some by raising and some by lowering their standards”
 The Americans do not have a separate philosophical school nor the contentions that
are seen in the Continent
 Americans are naturally disposed to following Descartes, even though they have not
read him; there are no longer class-specific philosophies because everyone is mobile
(upward and downward mobility).

Tocqueville on Women
 The unmarried woman is less constrained in America, but the married woman in
America is more constrained.
 A result of trading and religious basis: Double notions of religious purity via
regularity of the woman’s life and the commercial need for regularity for order and
prosperity.
 The American woman understands what is demanded of her. She has been taught
beforehand, and realizes that to deviate from the rules threatens her peace of mind,
honor and social existence.
 Yet she enters it willingly. She chooses it voluntarily and freely
 Often marriages are done after the woman has developed faculties of reason and
thought. Underage marriages are rare vs. Europe. Hence, the woman makes her own
choice and therefore she herself supports her own condition.
 Why does she give up pleasures? Because she has been well-educated, and realizes
the path to domestic happiness requires sacrifice; if she chooses that road, she sticks
to it.
 This is true even of those not in New England. The wives dutifully follow their
husbands even if it means giving up luxuries.

<Vocab words>
Aristocracy: An aristocracy is hierarchical and organized, and a check to the power of the
political authority as their power lay in birth and land, not bestowed on them by the ruler. It is
a closed-class system which doesn't allow mobility, and tends to persist across generations. A
lack of the “seed of aristocracy” makes America more equal than any other country in the
world. Tocqueville argues that the fact that the aristocracy keep a check on the ruler’s power
is an aristocratic virtue and should be replicated in democratic scenario through voluntary
political associations.

Democracy: Democratic revolution is the ongoing, inevitable progress towards equality of

social conditions. Tocqueville argues that the world is heading towards democracy, and that
there has been a general “levelling” between nobles and non-nobles in all of the Christian
world, progressing towards equality. Such a democratic revolution is universal, durable, and
eludes human interference, as it is Gods’ providence i.e. society is inevitably advancing to an
equality of conditions, God has destined it to.

Equality: There is a direction to history and it is towards ever greater equality. An equality
of social conditions is what he calls democracy. This equality is borne because it enables
social mobility, an open class system and possible hierarchical social status is achieved solely
through effort. Tocqueville also mentions that America is more equal than any other country
in the world.
However, at the same time, Tocqueville is ambivalent towards equality. He studies its vices
and virtues in American society and brings up institutions that can counter these vices.
Equality can lead to new forms of liberty or unfreedom (democratic despotism, and tyranny
of majority)

Freedom: Individual liberty; the ability of citizens to practice will and agency. Freedom is
often threatened in a democracy due to democratic despotism, but this threat can be
safeguarded through free press, and collective efforts through associations. Freedom is what
Tocqueville believes society should work towards (what he thinks must be cultivated in a
nation), but in reality, society develops towards equality.

Individualism: A condition in which people are increasingly preoccupied with their own
individual struggles to meet their daily needs. In such a case, they become isolated from
society at large, and depend entirely on the government for security, economic direction,
social order, and property allocation (this “isolation” similar to Durkheim’s anomie and
Marx’s alienation). Individualism leads to a kind of disinterest in civil issues that is facilitated
by an increasing equality of conditions because all citizens are embroiled in the same
struggles of daily life and because individuals begin to have blind faith in an equal
government. Individualism leads to democratic despotism as individuals become isolated
from each other and solely dependent on the government for security, economic
advancement, social order. The government hence gains the unchecked power to restrain
individual liberty by rules and regulations that soften, bend, and guide the will of man.

Tyranny of the majority: A feature of democratic society where public opinion, justice
system, and political leadership all are determined by the majority. Such a system gives the
majority an unlimited power, and deprives the minority a redressal of their issues. When the
authority of legislative and executive institutions depends on the support of the majority, the
majority has the power to not only make, but selectively break the laws it has made.
a feature of democratic society where public opinion, justice system, and political leadership
all are determined by the majority.

Democratic despotism: One of the vices of equality and democracy, democratic despotism
is a kind of despotism that arises in an equality of social conditions.
It is caused by individualism, which makes individuals become isolated from each other and
solely dependent on the government for security, economic advancement, social order.
The government hence gains the unchecked power to restrain individual liberty by rules and
regulations that soften, bend, and guide the will of man. It has a tendency to develop in a
democracy because when people elect their sovereign, they view governmental control as a
privilege and not an attack on liberty. Citizens become incapacitated of personal agency, and
Tocqueville terms this as orderly, gentle, peaceful slavery.

Associations: Voluntary organizations of private citizens whose power has a civil (non-state)
source, and their jurisdictions (political, commercial or academic interests of citizens) are
autonomous. They are schools of liberty that check against government’s tyranny as they
collectively protest against government’s encroachment of members’ rights. Tocqueville
argues that the fact that the aristocracy keep a check on the ruler’s power is an aristocratic
virtue and should be replicated in democratic scenario through voluntary political
associations.

Industrial aristocracy: A kind of aristocracy that develops in a democracy. As people grow

equal, the demand for goods becomes extensive and general, and to fulfill such a demand, the
specialization of labor is essential. However, in becoming specialized in a particular
profession and occupation, people become stagnant in their job (alienation, anomie). Just like
in aristocracies, differences between people emerge, some are rich and others very poor.
(similar to Marx’s theory of capitalism) A professional relationship between workman and
master develops, though it is not a partnership or a personal relationship. This is different
from erstwhile aristocracies in that there is no personal relationship, or promise of protection
like in the noble-serf relationship. Rather, this relationship is solely governed by extraction of
labor, and earning of wages.
If inequality of conditions was to enter society again, this is how it would enter.
It is the harshest form of aristocracy as no personal relations exist between workmen and
master, but also the gentlest form of aristocracy because there is no stratified class as no
personal feelings among fellow workmen and fellow masters: the relationship is governed
only by money, labor and individual concerns.

God's providence: It is God’s will to lead society to ever greater equality.

Ever increasing equality is universal, durable, and eludes human interference.
Thus, equality of conditions is Gods’ providence i.e. society is inevitably advancing to an
equality of conditions, God has destined it to.
<Views>
1.What does the theorist seek to explain?
The vices and virtues of democracy; how the society is progressing towards democracy
2.Who is the theorist responding to? How?
State of affairs in France
3.What is their theoretical approach?
Equality of conditions
4. What is the primary causal factor in their theory?
Equality of conditions; individualism (in the case of democratic despotism)
5. Views on division of labor? Why?
With the division of labor, people’s work becomes more repetitive and simple and their
abilities become a lot more limited. However, the masters continually expand and exercise
their intelligence. As for sexual division of labor, Tocqueville advocates it wholeheartedly (or
at least thinks it inevitable)
Additionally, division of labor leads to people become stagnant in their job (alienation,
anomie). Just like in aristocracies, differences between people emerge, some are rich and
others very poor. (similar to Marx’s theory of capitalism) A professional relationship between
workman and master develops, though it is not a partnership or a personal relationship. This
is different from erstwhile aristocracies in that there is no personal relationship, or promise of
protection like in the noble-serf relationship. Rather, this relationship is solely governed by
extraction of labor, and earning of wages.

6. What is the defining characteristic of modernity?

Democracy; equality
7. Is the theorist’s outlook on modernity optimistic/pessimistic/ambivalent?
Ambivalent. Democracy has its own set of vices and virtues.