“I know of no higher principle than that of right.” Tocqueville provides a powerful argument in Chapter 12 of the supremacy of citizen’s rights and how democracy best defends them. Rights are effectively virtues in the political world, according to him. This is shown by the example of property. Because everyone in a democracy has property of his own to defend, everyone recognises the principles upon which he holds the property. The same applies to ‘voting rights’: “The government of a democracy brings the notion of political rights to the level of the humblest citizens, just as the dissemination of wealth brings the notion of property within the reach of all men.” Tocqueville goes on to say that this is one of the greatest advantages of democracy because it results in the movement towards democracy being accompanied by an equality of conditions for each citizen.
The last major virtue of democracy that Tocqueville flags up is that it encourages a respect for law. “Those who wish to attack the laws must consequently either change the opinion of the nation or trample upon its decision.” By giving authority to the elected leaders, the laws they create are legitimate and those who disagree with them must change them by the power of argument, not by the power of force or by virtue of being born into the ruling class. This does mean that the interests of all are not necessarily protected by the law and “in the United States, where the poor rule, the rich have always to fear from the abuse of their power.”
Democracy is accompanied by an excessive drive for equality. The sovereignty of the people and the power of public opinion are corollaries to the idea of equality. However, if all are equal, then no one person has any basis to claim right to rule over another and decisions are based on the will of the majority. This can lead to despotism. Tocqueville labels it ‘tyranny of the majority’ because the majority become despotic in the absence of checks on power of the majority to influence the government.
There is a further tyranny in democracy – that of morality. The moral force that the opinion of the majority has on society is extremely powerful. As all are equal, no one opinion is greater than another; the opinion held by the majority must be the best one and this leads to a tendency to a abandon freedom of thought in democratic societies. Indeed, to go against it is contradictory to the principle of equality. In Tocqueville’s view, this form of tyranny can be seen as even worse than past tyrannies: “Formerly tyranny used the clumsy weapons of chains and hangmen; nowadays even despotism, though it seemed to have nothing to learn, has been perfected by civilisation.”
There are two further intangible dangers of democracy. Firstly, democracy encourages individualism: “Individualism is of democratic origin, and threatens to grow as conditions get more equal.” Equality tends to make people’s interests focus in on themselves. Without the societal bonds/duties present as in aristocracy, people do not realise their dependence on each other. Secondly, democracy encourages materialism. The passion for equality results in citizens thinking that they ought to be able to have as much wealth as everyone else. Indirectly, materialism also comes from the philosophical tendency fostered by democracies to disdain lofty ideas or thoughts of eternity. Therefore, people may neglect to use their political freedom which may lead to people willingly abandoning freedom for benevolent despotism on the promise that this better provides and ensures an orderly society with material prosperity.
There are also institutional dangers present in democracy. With a disproportionately high amount of power in most legislative branches (because they are most directly representative of the opinion of the people), democracies can become tyrannical if there are not sufficient checks on this power. Also, allowing the re-election of the executive (in America’s case, the President), they lose the ability to act independently according to their judgements. This increases the danger of the ‘tyranny of the majority’ as the executive must bow to the whims of the majority. The direct election and short duration of representatives also results in a mediocre body of representatives who worry constantly about public opinion rather than acting in the public’s best interests.
In analysing America, he admires how many of their institutions are adapted to counter many of the dangers of democracy. In particular, he focuses on the checks and balances provided by the judiciary, regionalisation, the freedom of association and press, and religion.
With an independent and influential judiciary (through the power of judicial review), a democracy allows certain laws to be deemed ‘unconstitutional’. This is a check on the ‘tyranny of the majority’ because it prevents the executive from overstepping the line and infringing civil liberties (which are, to a certain extent, guaranteed under the constitution). Because judges are not elected and serve life terms, they are more independent according to Tocqueville. Also, the jury system, while not always the most reliable, does serve a positive political function in forcing citizens to think about other people’s affairs and educating them in the use of their freedom. In Tocqueville’s opinion, “jury system is one of the most effective means of popular education.”
The presence of local self-government and administrative decentralisation is one of the major significant political differences between the US and France in Tocqueville’s time. The failure of the French revolution was mainly due to overwhelming administrative centralisation, ensuring that citizens lost the taste to exercise their freedom. “Where power is dispersed, action is clearly hindered, but there is strength everywhere.” The “multiplication of political rights” meant that citizens were no longer passive spectators of operations of government between periodic national elections and the sense of independence and personal capacity was increased.
With the freedom of the press and association, the dangers of individualism discussed earlier were suppressed. Associations were an excellent tool, according to Tocqueville, to allow people to exercise their freedom by coming together and taking part in politics. The press connected individuals because associations need a means of communicating with their members and spreading their message to the public.
Finally, but perhaps most importantly in Tocqueville’s mind, was the power of religion, which was highly beneficial both politically and socially. It teaches people how to use their freedom well. Since the government provides no absolute standards (it is impartial), it is necessary for religion to provide a ‘moral boundary’. “Despotism may be able to do without faith, but freedom cannot…How could a society escape destruction if, when political ties are relaxed, moral ties are not tightened?” Religion also combats individualism by bringing people together in a community of common belief. Tocqueville says that it is practically the only means of counteracting materialistic tendencies of democratic peoples. It turns people’s minds from the physical and material, to the immortal and eternal. To sum this up, if religion is disrupted, there is a danger that “the soul may for a moment be found empty of faith and love of physical pleasures come and spread and fill all.”
Tocqueville, in Democracy in America highlights the relationship between freedom and equality in society. Above all, he has a passionate love for liberty, and this is why he writes about the beauty of democracy as found in America. But his work also serves as a warning of the dangerous trends within some forms of democracy that threaten liberty, as well as some of the means by which liberty can be preserved, which France lacked institutionally and intangibly. These ideas are summarised by Tocqueville in the last few lines of the book: “The nations of our day cannot prevent conditions of equality from spreading in their midst. But it depends upon themselves whether equality is to lead to servitude or freedom, knowledge or barbarism, prosperity or wretchedness.”
Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America
Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America
Jack Lively, Social and Political Thought of Alexis de Tocqueville
Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America
Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America
Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America
Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America
Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America
Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America
Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America
Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America
Alexis de Tocqueville, Journeys to England and Ireland
Siedentrop, Two Liberal Traditions
Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America
Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America
Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America