Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
The criticisms that de Tocqueville levels against American society, and especially against some of the particulars of its governance, continue in his discussion of the potential tyranny of the majority. Americans regard the majority much as Europeans viewed their king, according to de Tocqueville: it can do no wrong, and any wrong it does do is only due to bad advice or information. This subservience, according to de Tocqueville, creates the potential for a majority to rob a minority of its rights through legal means. While this danger certainly exists, however, de Tocqueville fails to demonstrate how it is worse than the tyranny of a monarch.
In addition to the arguments and political observation that de Tocqueville makes, there are other key features of Democracy in America that stand out to the modern reader as interesting tidbits of information, and aspects of American history that have perhaps not been fully explored in the past. The detail that de Tocqueville provides regarding the Federalist and Anti-Federalist parties, for instance, makes the history seem much more recent and alive (which, of course, it was in de Tocqueville's time); gazing at the famous Federalist Papers and their answers today does not...
Another interesting revelation to many readers is the fact that the press was presumably still quite limited in Europe during America's early years. De Tocqueville's comments on the free state of the press that he encounters in the United States imply that this is definitely not the case elsewhere, which is somewhat difficult to imagine giving the now automatic-seeming right and ability to publish and disseminate information freely. Though there are of course countries today that restrict their journalists and citizens in their pursuit of information and publication, it is still difficult to imagine a Europe after the Enlightenment without a free press.
Democracy in America recounts a very specific view of early United States' history. There is a great deal of objective observation available in the text, if one can sift out the political and rhetorical material. The book is highly interesting and significant for this material as well, however, and has remained a classic of education and political though for this very reason.
De Tocqueville When concept takes on many different meanings it probably means nothing. One of the things that it is becoming apparent is that the terms "public sphere" and "civil sphere" appear to take on different meanings when described by different writers. Nonetheless, these terms and the nuances in what they represent depending on the writer can move beyond false universals and thinking that is entrenched in rigid definitions (Edwards 2004). Alexis
Although De Tocqueville incorrectly stereotypes Americans as being inordinately serious in Book 3, Chapter 15, he pinpoints the essence of the typical American: "Americans, who almost always preserve a staid demeanor and a frigid air, nevertheless frequently allow themselves to be borne away, far beyond the bounds of reason, by a sudden passion or a hasty opinion and sometimes gravely commit strange absurdities." De Tocqueville calls this "ignorance which
Tocqueville Alexis de Tocqueville was an aristocratic young Frenchman with vaguely liberal sentiments who wondered if the new democracy in the United States had any ideas that could be applied to France and other European countries. His real audience was therefore the middle and upper classes in Europe, although his book never became a popular classic or standard university text there like it did in the United States. Indeed, few people
What he found, in contrast to Europe, was that the American social ethic was not based on aristocracy, and in fact Americans seemed to have a deep-seated fear and loathing of European titles (at least the middle and common classes). Instead, Americanism was based on a system in which hard work and money-making (e.g. aggressive capitalism) was the dominant ethic of the time. In this period of radical change and
At the same time, democracy allows people ith different views come together on a particular subject they share an opinion, state their mind and make a positive change. Q6. What does De Tocqueville mean by 'artificial solidarity'? Artificial solidarity resembles a tailored feeling of solidarity based on a foundation that is not real and one which was applied to a society without real background that would support it in a true
Plato vs. De Tocqueville -- The ideal vs. The real vision of the democratic character and the democratic state Both the Greek philosopher Plato and French traveler Alexis de Tocqueville approached different 'lived' versions of contemporary democracy as outsiders looking in. Plato (using the persona and voice of the deceased teacher Socrates) critiqued ancient Greek democracy with the aim of putting in that democracy's stead an idealized version of a republic,