What is the relationship to what Tocqueville called “democratic despotism?

I

··-- I.

ISAAC KRAMNICK is the Richard}. Schwartz Professor of Govern- ment and the Vice Prov:,ost for Undergradµate Education at Cornell University in Ithaca, New York. His writings in ·political theory include studies of Bolingbroke and Burke, and Republicanism and Bourgeois Radicalism. He is the co-author (with Barry Sheerman, MP) of a biogtaphy of Harold Laski and a co-author (with R. Laurence Moore) of a book on church and state in America, The Godless Constitution. He has also edited The Federalist Papers and Thomas Paine's Common Sense for Penguin Classics ahd the Portable Enlightenment Reader for Viking.

I 1 ,

\

!,

I I

I ' .

L \" '\

ALEXIS DE TOCQUEVILLE

Democracy in America and Two Essays on America

Translated by GERALD E. BEVAN with an Introduction and Notes by

ISAAC KRAMNICK

PENGUIN BOOKS

"

AUTHOR'.S INTRODUCTION

·. Of all the novel things which attracted my attention during my stay in the United States, none struck me more forcibly than the

·. equality of social conditions. I had no difficulty in discovering die extraordinary influence this fundamental fact exerts upon

·. the progress of society; it sets up a particular direction to public attitudes, a certain style to the laws, fresh guidelines to governing authorities, and individual habits to those governed.

Soon I came to recognize that this very fact extends its influ- . cnce well beyond political customs and laws; it exercises no·less power over civil society than it does over the goyemment. It forms opinion, creates feelings, proposes· ways of acting, and

· .. transforms anything it lloes not directly instigate itself. , Consequently, as I studied American society, I increasingly · viewed this equality of soci,µ conditions as the factor which : generated all the others and I discovered that it represented a , central focus in which all my observations constantly ended.

Then I turned my thoughts back to our own hemisphere.and . it seemed to me that I could see something similar there to the ' situation I observed in the New World. I saw that, while the . equality of social conditions had not reached.the extreme limits

of the United States, it_was growing closer to that level and that the democracy prevailing over American societies appeared to

: me to be advancing rapidly to power in Europe. That was the moment I conceived the iaea for the book that

lies before the reader. Everyone can see that a widespread revolution toward democ-

. racy is in full swing amongst us but it is not viewed by everyone • in the same way. Some look upon it as something new and,

I2 DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA

taking it as an accident, are still hoping to-J,e able to check its progress, whereas others consider it irresistible because they see it as the most sustained, longstanding, and permanent develop- ment ever found in history.

I turn my thoughts back for a moment to the France of seven hundred years ago which I discover was split between a small number of families who owned the land and ruled over the people living there; the right of governing at that time moved down the generations along with the family inheritance; men had only one method of acting against each other and that was force; only one source of power existed and that was landed property.

But along came the political power of the clergy which, from the outset, soon expanded. The clergy opened its ranks to all, rich and poor alike, commoner and lord alike; by means of the

,/ Church, equality began to permeate the government and the man who might have vegetated in eternal enslavement as a serf was elevated to the heart of the nobility when he became a priest, often taking his seat above kings.

As society became more civilized and stable over time, the different relationships between men became more complicated and numerous. The need of -civil laws was sharply felt which gave rise to lawgivers emerging from the darkened precincts of the law courts or the dusty backwater of the clerks' offices to sit in the courts of monarchs alongside feudal barons wrapped in ermine and mail.

Kings suffered ruin from their great enterprises; nobles grew exhausted in their private feuds; commoners made money from trade. The influence of money began to assert itseU in state affairs. Business opened a new pathway to power and the finan- cier became a political influence both despised and flattered.

Gradually education expanded and a taste for literature and the arts was awakened; the mind then turned into an element of success; knowledge was a weapon of government and intelli- gence, a social force; men of letters entered public life.

Meanwhile, as, new avenues to power were discovered, the value of high birth declined. In the eleventh century nobility was beyond all price; in the thirteenth, it could be purchased; 1270

AUTHOR'S INTRODUCTION I3

saw the first appointment to .the peerage and the principle of equality was at last introduced into government by "the anstoc-

racy itself. Over the past seven hundred years it has someti~es ha ppene?

that, in their struggle against the authority of.the king or m t~e1r attempt to reliete their rivals of power, the nobles have given some political power to the people.

Still more frequently we have seen kings involving the lower Ji, classes of the state in government in order to reduce the power ,}, of the aristocracy. _,--''_·_• French kings have shown themselves t;o be the most energetic

and consistent of levelers. When they have been ambitious and strong, they have striven to raise the people to the same level as

if' the nobles. When they have been mild-tempered and weak,,they i have allowed the people to ·rise under their own efforts. Some -~ - have supported democracy through their talents, others through J; their defects. Louis XI and Louis XIV took care to reduce '11:' everything below the throne to the same level, while Louis XV' .,,. .ended up in the dust along with the whole of his court. ~ - As soon as citizens began to own land on any other than a :;;- feudal tenure and when emergence of personal property could -~:. in its turn confer influence and power, all further discoveries in "· - the arts and any improvement introduced into trade and indus-

1 .. : try could not ,fail to instigate just as many new f 1 e~tures odf

I '>' equality among men. From that moment, every new y mvente

i[_· procedure, every newly found need, every desire craving ful- ;f,- fillment were steps to the leveling of all. The taste for luxury, :f? the love of warfare, the power of fashion, the most superficial J and the deepest passions of the human heart seemed to work

1 ;r, together to impoverish the wealthy and to enrich the poor· h d ~i From the moment when the exercise of intelligence a ·-,t ,, become a source of strength and w.ealth, each step in the develop- "/. ment of s~ience, each new area of knowledge, each fresh idea

· :'i had to be viewed as a seed of power placed within people's ~ grasp. Poetry, eloquence, memory, the beauty of wit, the fires J of imagination, the depth of thought, all these gifts which heaven

I :!' shares out by chance turned to the advantage of democracy and, i cym who, ;,ey bO"""" ro m,-,, of don=cy, d,cy ""'

I' , 'I I,

'4 DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA

pro~ote? its cause by highlighting the natural grandeur of man. Its v1ctones s_pread, therefore, alongside those of civilization and educat10n. Literature was an arsenal open to all, where the weak and the poor could always find arms.

Reading through t_he pages of-our history, we shall scarcely find any great events which did not promote the cause of equality over the last seven hundred years.

.1:"he Crusad~s" and the English" wars decimated the nobles and ~1v1ded up their lands; the setting up of municipal corporations ~traduced democratic freedom -into the feudal monarchy; the mventton of firearms reduced the serf ·and the nobleman to the same level on the field of battle; the printing press presented the sa~e resources to the rpinds of everyone; the postal service deposited knowledge on the threshold of the poor man's cottage as much as at the gate of the palace; Protestantism maintained that all men ~re equally capable of finding the pathway to heaven. The discovery of America opened up a thousand new roads to fortune and delivered wealth and power to the most humble of adventurers.

If you look closely at what happened in France from th eleventh cenrury, ~au will ~at fail to notice that, at the end 0 ~ each fi_fry-year penod, a twm revolution has affected the state of ~oc1ety. The nobleman has dropped down the social scale while the commoner has risen; the one moves down, the other climbs up. Each half-century brought them closer and they will soon meet .

. No: is this simply a feature peculiar to France. In whatever d1rect1on we glanc~, we perceive the same revolution in motion throughout the enttre Christian world.

Everywhere welook, the various events of people's lives have turned to t?e adv~ntage o( democracy; all men have helped its progress with their efforts, both those who aimed to further its success and those who never dreamed of supporting it, both those who fought on its behalf and those who were its declared opponents; everyone has been driven willy-nilly along the same road and everyone has joi~ed the common cause, some despite

h themselves, others unwittmgly, like blind insttuments in the ands of God.

I I I

'5 UTHOit'S INTRODUCTION

The gradual .unfurling of equality in social conditions is, therefore, a providentiatfact which reflects its principal charac- teristics; it is universal, it is lasting and it constantly eludes ·human interference; its development is served equally by every

. event and every human being. Would it be wise to think that a social change which lies so

. far back in history could be halted by the efforts of a single generation? Can it be believed thaf democracy, which has

. destroyed feudalism and overcome kings, will retreat befo_re the wealthy or the middle classes? Will it stop now that 1t has

' become so powerful and its adversaries so weak?

I .• (_-'· . ,,,

._,;:-.- '-~

t

So where are we going? No one could possibly say, for we have already lost the terms of comparison: social conditions are currently more equal among Christians than they have ever been at any time in history or anywhere in the world; thus the extent of what has already been achieved prev~nts our seeing what

may still be achieved. The whole of the book in front of the reader has been written

under the pressure of a kind of religious terror exercised u~on the soul of the author by the sight of this irresistible revolut10n which.has progressed over so many centuries, su:mounti~g all obstac1es, and which is strn advancing today amid the rums 1t

has caused. God does not need to speak for himself in order for us to

discover the definitive signs of his will; it is enough to examine the normal course of nature and the consistent tendency of events. I know without needing to hear the voice of the Creator that the stars trace out in space the orbits which his hand has

drawn . If lengthy observation and sincere reflection brough'. contem-

porary man to recognize that the gradual and progressive devel- opment of equality constitutes both the past and the futu~e of his liistory, that discovery alone would confer upon this development the sacred character of a decree from the ruler upon high. Any desire to halt democracy would then appear a struggle against God himself so that nations would merely have to fit in with that social state imposed upon them by Providence.

The Cliristian nations of our day appear to-me to presept a

~

....,

'1,1

r: l

x6 DEMOCRACY tN AMERICA

frightening spectacle; the change carrying them along is already powerful enough for it to· be impossible to stbp yet not swift enough for us to despair of bringing_ it under control. Their qestiny is in their own hands but it will soon slip from their grasp.

J'he first of the duties currently imposed -upon the rulers of our society is to.educate democracy, to reawaken, if possible, its beliefs1 to purify its morals, to control its actions, gradually to substitute statecraft for its inexperience and awareness of its true interests for its blind instincts, to adapt its government to times and places, and to mold it according to circumstances and people.

A new political science is needed for a totally new world. But that is something we scarcely consider. Positioned as we

are in the' middle of a rapid stream, we stare fixedly at a few ruins we can still see on the shore as the current drags us away backwards toward the abyss.

Jn no country in Europe has the great social revolution I have just described made more rapid advances than in France but this progress has always been haphazard.

Never have the heads of state made any advance preparations for-it; it has occurred despite them or unknown to them. The most powerful, the most intelligent, and the most upright classes of the nation have not made any attempt to take it over so as to control it. Democracy has thus been abandoned to its primitive instincts; it has grown like those children who, deprived of a father's care, are left to fend for themselves in the streets of our towns and who come to learn only the vices and wretchedness of our society. We seem unaware of its arrival even when it has unexpectedly taken control of supreme power. Then each person has slavishly submitted to its slightest whim; it is wor- shipped as the symbol of force. When afterwards it was weak- ened by its own excesses, the legislators conceived the rash plan of destroying it instead of attempting to ~ucate and amend it. Their only idea was to drive it out of government with no wish to teach it how to govern.

The result was that the democratic revolution has taken place in the fabric of society without anyone's effecting the changes

I7 UTHOR'S INTRODUCTION

d s necessary to make this in laws, ideas, cu~toms, a~ :i:.:~::emocracy minus anything revolution beneficial. Thus w . rural advantages· already to lessen its defects or :o proi;ote its:~ remain ignora~t of the aware of the defects it enta1 s"'we s

benefits it can bring. f th supported by the,aristocracy, When the power O e ~own~f Europe society, in the midst

' peacefully governed the_ nat1dons I kind; of happiness which - f . h dness enioye severa .

o its wretc e , . . . or apprec·1ating at the present h d.ffi lty in ,magmmg -we ave 1 cu

.• tirn.;he power of a few subjer:e~e:e: ~::~;::~~~:~:;;;~:: against the tyranny of thed. . g, haracter in the eyes of the

d d 'th an almost 1vme c . h ;:p~7..:e, ::rived from the very respect they aroused the w1s

never to abuse their power. d' ranee from the people, h bl I ced at a remote is .

T e ndo es, Ph~! the kind of benev~lent and quiet interest m assume meanw i e nts to his flock and, far from their destiny that t~ shepherf g;~ey watched over their fate as seeing the poor as e1r equ; .: their hands by Providence. though it were a duty _plac~ .' a social state other than their

The people, never ,magu;nng h uals of h" k' n· that they could ever become t e eq .

;i::; ,::le:s:i;~f ~;\~:; ~~~;~nf~e~~::~~;~~~::~:~t~;~: d1scussmg th _gh · . d" fficulty norfeeling any hum1h- kind and fair, while havmg no 1 ' would the inevitable ation, in1:oler~ting thetr,h~rsh~ess;:: ~~:is of God. Moreover, calamities which they recet~ed at d had established custom and habits had set lnn1ts to _tyranny an

if- k' d f I t the very heart of v10lence. ;;,j',__ a m o aw a . , th thoughtthat anyone f Since the nobleman did noh~ enter:al mges ewhich he regarded as 11,;'._- ·gh · h to snatch away 1s prlVI e ' · · r,; m1 .. t w1s d . ce the serf looked upon his inferior position ~:_: legiumate, an sm utable natural order, we may imagine that

as~ result of the nnrn 1

d ill "ght be established between these a kind of mutua goo w m• h · ciety

·,• two classes so differently endo~ed bybfate. At,t at :~:~;;e not beheld inequality and unhappmess ut men s so

humiliated. . th habit of obedience that It is not the exercise of power nor e

r8 DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA

degrade men but the exercise of a power which is regarded as unlawful, or obedience to a power seen as wrongly held and oppressive.

On the.one side lay property, violence,and leisure along with the pursmt ofluxury, refinements of taste, intellectual pleasures, and th~ cult1vat1on of the arts; on the oth<!r, work, coarse living condrtions, and ignorance.

But at.the h~art ohhis ignorant and ·coarse crowd you _came ac~oss. energetic pass10ns, generous opinions, deep beliefs, and pr1m1t1ve virtues.

The body of society, organized in this way was able to enjoy stability, strength, and, above all, a sense of h~nor.

But now the classes are muddled; those barriers raised between men are being lowered; estates are being split up and power shared; education is expa~ding and men's intelligence tends toward equality; t~e condition of society is becoming democratic and the ~uthonty of democracy is finally taking root peacefully m all mst1tut10ns and all social customs.

So I can conceive of a society in which everyone would look upon the law as his own work, would become attached to it and obey it quite easily; a society in which the authority of the government would be respected as necessary not divine and in which the affection accorded to the head of ~tate woulcl not be a passion but a reasoned and peaceful feeling. Since-each man would have his rights, the preservation of which would be guaranteed, a manly trust would be established between all classes along with a kind of mutual courtesy, removed alike from arrogance or servility.

Th': people, instructed as to their true interests, would realize that, m order to benefit from the advantages·of society, they would have to bow to its requirements. The freedom to associate that citizens would enjoy could then replace the individual power of the nobles and the state would be protected from tyranny and license.

!_realize that in a democratic state established in this way, society will not stand still, but the changes in .the community ca? _be ordered and !'rogressive; if such a society displays less bnlhance than an anstocracy, there will also Be les_s wretched-

· UTHOR'S INTRODUCTION I9

· ~ss; pleasures:will be less outrageous and wellbei~g will be -.hared by all; the sciences will be o? a smaller ~cale but 1gnoran~e will be less common; opinions will be· less vigorous and habits gentler; you will notice.more vices and fewer cnm.es.' .

Jrrthe absence of the enthusiasm and hearof rehg1?us beliefs, sometimes great sacrifices mJ!Y be obtained.from Citlzens as .a

.• result of their understanding and experience. Since every man 1s weak he feels the same.needs as his.fellows and,_ kno),Vmg that ·he can gain their support only if he offers them his help, he will

· quickly discover that his own pnvate mterest fuses with that of : the whole community. · · The nation, taken as a whole, will be less brilliant,. less seH-

important, less sturdy perhaps but the majority of cmz~ns will enjoy a greater degree of prosperity and the people will seem peaceful not because they have abandoned the hope of better things but because they know they are well off.

If everything failec\ to be good and· useful m such a state of affairs at least society would have taken hol<l;of whatever good and us~ful elements it offered and men, having renounced forever the social advantages provided by aristocracy, would ha'le grasped from democracy al! the benefits it ca~ present to them.

·But as we have lefr'behind the social cond1t10ns of our ances- tors and have cast behind us their institutions, ideas, and cus-

·zr toms in one confused heap, what have we put in their placer

I .,,,._ The·renown of royal au.thority has vanished away without

. being replaced. by the majesty of laws; nowadays the people despise authority while fearing jt, and fear now extorts from

,.. · them inore than respect and love achieved formerly. . ·,~ I observe that we have destroyed those independent bemgs t who were capable of fighting single-handed ag_ain

1 sft ty

11 r~y

,. but I perceive that government has inhented. by 1tse a . t ose .z. powers it has wrenched from families, corporate bodies, or

individuals. Thus, the power of a small_ number _of citizens, sometimes oppressive and often conservative, has given way to the weakness of the whole community.

The dividing up of fortunes has reduced the distance separat- ing rich from poor but as the gap has grown smaller they have discovered fresh reasons for mutual hatred; casting ternfied and

20

DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA

envious glances at one another, each seeks to deprive the other of po~er; for both of them equally, the concept of rights does not exist and power appears as the sole reason for action in the present and the only guarantee for the future. ·

Th_e poor ~an has retained most of the prejudices of his forefathers without their beliefs, their ignorance without their VlrtUes; he ~as entertained the dogma of self-interest as a guide for his actions without understanding how it works and his self-centeredness is no less blind than was formerly his devotion to others.

Society i~ peaceful not because it is aware of its own strength and wellbemg but because it believes itself to be weak and ~nsteady; it is frightened that any effort it makes may cost it its life. Everyone senses the malaise but no one has the necessary courage or energy to pursue any better course. People have desires, re~ets, sorrow~, and joys which produce nothing visible or bstmg, like the pass10ns of old men which end up as nothing but impotence.

~us, we have abandoned whatever advantages the old regime possessed. without grasping those gains offered by the present state of thmgs; we have destroyed an aristocratic society and, a~ we complacently stand in the midst of the ruins of the old bui!dmg, we seem to be willing to stay there forever.

What is occurring in the intellectual world is no less deplorable.

Since democracy in France has been hampered in its progress or abandoned, w1t?out support, to its lawless passions, it has overturned _everythmg that has crossed its path and has shaken ~verythmg 1t ha~ not completely destroyed. We have not seen it gradually_ tak1.ng over society in order to assert its power peace~lly; 1t has. no_t ceased to march forward through the confus10n and agitation of a conflict. Flushed by the heat of th': s_truggl': and pushed beyond his natural boundaries by the op1mons and _excesses of_ his opponents, each person loses sight of t_he very _obJect of his aims and expresses himself in a language which 1s alien to his real feelings and his innermost instincts.

As a_consequenceof that arises the strange and confused state of affarrs we are forced to witness.

I

~-

;AUTHOR'S INTRODUCTION

I w;iste my time in scouring through my recollections for. I can find nothing more worthy of sorrow or pity than what 1s happening before our eyes. It is as if w': have rup~ed. the natural link between a man's opinions and his tastes or his actions

. and his beliefs. The harmony which has always been o~served between the feelings and the ideas of men appears m _rums and all the rules governing moral parallels have been abolished ..

. We still come across zealous C::hristians whose rmnds denve spiritual nourishment from the truths of the next world and who doubtless remain excited by human freedom as the source of all moral greatness. Christianity, which_ ~as made all men equal before God, will not flinch to see all c1t1zens equa! befo~e the law. But by a strange combination of events, rehg10n 1s

· temporarily involved with powers overturned_ by_ democracy and if often happens that it repels that equality it loves and curses freedom as an opponent would, whereas it could support freedom's struggles by taking it by the hand. .

Alongside these religious men, I observe others whose sights are upon the earth ratlter than toward heaven: They are the followers of liberty not simply because they see 1t as th': source of the noblest virtues but,above all because they regard 1t as the spring of the greatest benefits. They sincerely wish to guarantee its authority and to enable men to taste its blessings. I realize that these people are about to call. upon the help of.religio~, for they must know that the reign of_ liberty c~nnot b_e established without morality, nor morality without beh~fs. It IS enough for them to have seen religion on the side of therr opponents; some attack it while others dare not defend it.

Past centuries have witnessed immoral and venal souls advo- cating slavery while some independent spirits and ge~erous hearts were struggling in a hopeless fight for the preservation of human freedom. These -days we often encounter a few men, noble and proucl by nature, whose opinions are _directly at variance with their inclinations and who praise a slavishness and degradation they have never personally experienced. Others, ?n the other hand, speak of freedom as if they we~e aware of its sanctity and majesty and noisily claim for humamty those nghts which they have always refused to acknowledge.

l

DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA

I observe virtuous and peaceful men h h placed as leaders of the po I w o ave naturally been pure morals quiet habits pu at~ around them because of their sincere affec~ion for their ~:::t t , a:d education. Filled with a sacrifices for it. However c,·v·liry,_t eyftare rfieady to make great

. , 1 zat10n o en nds th b . ene!llles; they confuse it b . . em to e its of evil is, in their minds a_ uses w,bthl ,tsj· blessings and the idea · s, msepara Y mked with that hi h 1snew. w c

Alongside them, I see others who strive in the n

d ~ess, to thurn men into materialistic being' s and wahmoe of pro- 1scover t e exp d" h"J . want to

knowledge far re':n:::d~r~ e P:~~n[ scant attention to fairness, nothing to do with virtue. T:;;,se e ,e s, and prosperity which has of modern civilization, insolent! pe'f!'l~ ar~lled the champions usurping a position left o t y f ng mselves at its head, their unworthiness. pen ° t em and one which highlights

So where are we now? Men of religion fi h ·

freedom attack the g1· t_ agamst freedom and the friends of re 1gions· some nob! d

prai~e slavery while some di;honor bl e an g~nerous spirits cate mdependence· som h b a e an~ servile souls advo- opposed to all pr~gres e ohnlora le and enlightened citizens are

s w 1 e some unpatr' t' d · men become apostles of ci ·1· . d IO :c an immoral

H v1 izat.1on an education' ave all centuries resembled our ow ~ .

looked out upon a world like our o n. Has. man always ent, where virtue is without . wn, _whe~e nothmg is consist- the love of order is 1·oined togeam~s, glinem~s w~hout honor, where h I n me at10n ror t d th o y worship ofliberty to a disdain£ r the I yranny an_ e casts a dim light upon h . 0 aw, where conscience I uman actions and wh h. onger seems to be prohibited . ere not mg any true or false? or permitted, honest or shameful,

Am _I to believe that ,the Creator made m . strugglmg endlessly with the intellectu I an to }eave him rounds us? I cannot think so. God i a wretchedness that sur- more stable future for E . s prepanng a calmer and I uropean societies· I a f . p ans but I shall never stop b r . . h m unaware o his

fathom them and I prefer te ,evmg m t em becau~e I cannot capacities than his·justice. o mistrust my own mtellectual

AUTHOR'S INTRODUCTION

There is one country in the world where the great social revolution I speak of seems to have gradually reached its natural

. limits; it has taken place there simply and easily, or rather it can · be stated that this particular country is seeing the results of the .· democratic revolution which we are undergoing without having

endured the revolution itself. The immigrants settling in America at the start of the seven-

teenth century somehow unlocked the democratic from all those other principles it had to contend with in the old communities of Europe and:they transplanted that alone to the New World, where it has been able to grow freely and develop its legislation peacefully by moving in harmony with the country's customs.

It seems beyond doubt that sooner or later we shall attain, like the Americans, an almost universal equality of social con- ditions. I am not concluding from this that we shall ever be necessarily led to draw the same political consequences which the Amerie'ans have derived from what is a similar state of society. I am far from supposing that they have found the only form of government available to a democracy but it is enough that in both countries the inspiration of laws and customs should be the same for us to take a great interest in finding out what it has produced in each of them.

It is not simply, therefore, to satisfy a curiosity, albeit justified, that I have ·examined America; my aim has been to discover lessons from which we may profit. It would be a bizarre mistake to think that I intended to write a hymn of praise; whoever reads this volume will be fully convinced tliat such was never my plan, any more than it has been my aim to advocate any form of government in particular; for I belong to those who believe that absolute perfection is ahnost never a feature of a system of laws. I have not even intended to judge whether this social revolution, which I believe to be irresistible, is advantageous or disastrous for mankind. I have acknowledged that this revolution is already accomplished or about to be so and I have chosen among those peoples who have experienced its effects the one in which its development has been the rp.ost comprehensive and peaceful, in order that I may make out clearly its natural consequences and the means of turning it to men's advantage. I confess that in

DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA

America I have seen ha . . there for an . more t n Amenca itself, I have looked its erson ,.image of the .essence of democracy, its inclinations kn p . . a ity, its.pre1ud1ces, its passions; my wish has b ' fro~t if only to. realize at least what we have to fear ore~:;~

In the first part of this work I h h show the direction which de ave, ~ erefore'. attempted to inclinations and abandoned a'I:nocr~cy .

1 ~ Am~ca, left to its

instincts has ·naturall . o~ Wit out drance to its

!:Je~n;~r onut; gove[U::::; a:~ :: g~::;~l C:e :~~::, i: t:: and drawba~ks w~~~~~:~;a:1:t ;::v~ discover the advantages Americans used to guide it and .those o s~ugh~ out the safeguards undertaken to highlight th t h~rs t ey ommed; I have

. e reasons w ,ch all · society. ow it to govern In a second part I · d .

socialconditionsa~d~:me to portray the influence.equality of . ·1 . mocrat1c government have exerted

c1v1 society up h b' 'd upon . ' on a its, I eas, and manners but I a b . mng to feel less enthusiastic about·ach' · th' m egm- being able to fulfill the task 1 £ ievmg is plan. Before become almost useless. Som:~tn or rys.elf, my work will have readers the leading traits of the e:n:e _ ,s bouhnd to reveal to concealin h . encan c aracter. and by fli g t ~ seriousness of the description beneath a cloak of h

ppancy, to end to the truth a charm with·which I Id ave adorned it. 1 cou not

I ~a!o not knowAmwh~ther I have succeeded in revealing :what e seen m enca but I am nfid .

wished.to do so and that, except unwi~glenlt hthat I smcerely

I,

Y, ave never gtven

At the time I published the fust edition of this . de Beaumont, my traveling comp . . Am ~ork, MollSleur Gustave his book entitled Marie Ou l'Esdamon m enca, was sn11 working on appeared. M. de Beaumo' nt's m . ~':age aux Etats-Unis, wWch has since f . am aim was to let peo I k th .. o Negroes m Anglo-American . . Pe now epos1t1on

fresh light upon~the question of ::;:ty. Hts wo~k ~II. cast a sharp and republics. I do not know whethe I ry' ?nekwhich is vital for the united h · d . r amm1sta en butit h avmg eeply interested those wh ·u . h •' seems to met at, seek out thC images in thC volum o ~1 d w; to satisfy their emotions and stillm6re substantial and long t' .. e eaumont's book should gain a above everything else long fo;r asrt·tn~ shuccess among those readers who,

' rea ms1g ts and profound truths.

AUTHOR'S INTRODUCTION

way to the need to adapt facts to ideas, instead of ideas to facts. Whenever a point could be supported by written documentary

evidence, I took care to revert to the original texts and to the most authentic and valued works. 2 I have cited my. sources in the-notes and anyone can verify them. Whenever it was a matter of opinion, political practice, or remarks on manners,.! sought to consult the most informed men. Whenever an issue was important or doubtful, I was not satisfied with one witness but formed my judgment on the evidence of many witnesses.

At this point, the reader must of necessity-take my word. I could often have quoted in support of my assertions authoritat- ive names which are well-known to him or which deserve to be, but I have refrained from doing so. A stranger'can often,learn important truths· at a host's fireside which the latter would perhaps conceal from a·friend. A host can find some relief from the silence ,he is forced to keep because he does not fear his indiscreertemarks to a stranger who will not•stay long. Each of these confidential conversations were recorded as soon as they took place but they will never leave my writing-case; I prefer to do injury to my narrative than add my name to that list of those travelers who repay the generous hospitality they received by causing sorrow.or awkwa;dness.

'1 realize that; despite my precautions, nothing is easier than to criticize this book should anyone ever think of doing so.

Those who wish to take a close look will, I think, discover a dominant thought which binds together, so to speak, the various sections of the'whole book. But the range of the topics which I have had to dea~ with is very wide and anyone attempting to single out one fact to challenge the body of facts, to quote one

2. Legislative and administrative documents have been supplied to me with a kindness which I shall always remember with gratititude. Among those American civil servants who have thus supported my researches, I will mention particularly Mr Edward Livingston, then Secretary of State (now the Minister Plenipotentiary in Paris). During my stay with Congress, Mr Livingston was quite willing to forward most of the documents which I possess relating to the federal government. Mr Livingston is one of those few men one likes from reading their writings, whom one admires and respects even before knowing them and to whom one is happy to owe a debt of gratitude.

DEMOCRACY IN AMP.RICA

idea wrenched from the main body of ideas, will manage to do so with ease.

I should, therefore, like people to do me the favor of reading my work in the same spirit that has guided my efforts and to judge· this book by the overall impression it leaves, just as I myself have come to my opinions not for a particular reason but through the mass of.evidence.

Neither should it be overlooked that the author who wishes to be understood is obliged to push each one of his ideas to its utmost theoretical conclusion and often to the limits of what is false and impracticable, for it is sometimes necessary to depart from the rules of logic in the case of actions, which is not the case with the spoken word. Man finds it almost as difficult to be inconsistent while speaking, as to be consistent in his actions.

Finally, I point out myself what a great many readers will regard as the fundamental defect of the work. This book does not exactly follow any particular person; in writing it I did not set'out to serve or oppose any party; I attempted not to view things differently from others but to look further; while they busy themselves with tomorrow, my wish was to contemplate the future.

THE

PART 1

CHAPTER I

EXTERIOR CONFIGURATION OF 'NORTHERN AMERICA

, N rth America divided into two vast regions, one inclining . . o toward the pole, the other toward the equator- . The Mississippi Valley-Traces fo~nd there of the ur:ez~: : of the planet-Shore of the Atlantic Ocean upon w ;~· h ' English colonies were found~d-Diffe,:ent aspects O No:

·: d S th America at the time of their discovery . l A':eri::: forests-Prairies-Wandering tribes of natives- . Their physical app;arance, customs, and languages-

Traces of an unknown people.

. . l ntours general features orth America gives us, m its externa co ,

' asily discernible at first glance. . . f ' A f ~derly method has prevailed m the separat10n o . sort o o . II A · l and ma1est1c

d and water mountain and va ey. s1mp e . . . t·on bee' omes evident in the very midst of the confus10n orgamza 1 . · f of features and amid the extreme vanauon O scene. . : It is divided almost equally inw ~o !vast ;rt:h;~e~;;:~

nfin d th north by the Arctic ctrc e an o ·. co e to e I h akes its way south, cast by the two great oceans. t t en m . fi II

; forming a triangle whose irregularly drawn sides na y come

. together bene/lth the great lakhes ofif Canaja· xtending over the ' The second starts where t e rst en s, e

remainder of the continent.

68 DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA

CHAPTER 4

sovi~iicRJ~~I6~~i: Jf6PLE IN AMERICA

It dominates all ofA . . h . me_rzcan society-I pl . t '! principle by the Ame . . m ementation of

Revofution-Deve" lop . rtcans even before their ment gtven to ·t b h

Gradual and irresistible d" . . ' Y t e Revolution-tmmutton of feudal systems ff . .

we wish to discuss the political I must start with the doctrine of th aws of_ the United States, we

The principle of the soverei e s~vere1gnty of the people. more or less at the heart ln( o the people which we find generally stays as it w ob ~ most all human institutions b

. , ere, uned deep I . , emg recognized or if £ . . t is obeyed without

h ·1 h ' , or a moment it b b h ast, Y t rust 1t back do · e roug t to light, we The will of the natiown mto the darkness of its sanctuary

b d b n 1s one of thos h ·

a use y schemers and ty e p rases most widely a . . rants of all ag s h ppear m votes bought b f es. ome ave seen it of a frightened or self s yk~gents o power, others in the votes

d . - ee mg minority s h

covere it in the silence of . . ome ave even dis- from this apparent subm. . a nahtJOn and have supposed that

In Am 1ss10n t ey had .gh , . erica the soverei n , of a n t: to control.

~ertam nations, a hidden !r :r the peop!e. is not, as with m custom, celebrated b I ;en notion; it is acknowledged reaches its fin"al aims w·yth aw.. t expands with freedom and

. • out 1mpedim If h country m the world where the d . ent. t ere is a single the people can be proper! a _octrme of the sovereignty of as it applies to the affairs ~f pprec1ated, where it can be studied be estimated, that country i soc1~ty tnd its advantages and risks

I have observed that f s un ou tedly America. sove~eignty of the peo~l:~:d tt:e:utset, ~e. principle of the English colonies in Am · the dnvmg force of the th enca although ·t d .

e government of societ f I I s ommation over T · d ywas ar essthenth · · h wo ,mpe iments, one e I . an It is t ese days.

xterna ' one mternal, checked its

CIPLE OF THE SOVEREIGNTY OF THE PEOPLE IN AMERICA 69

asive progress. It could not disclose itself openly in the laws · he colonies since they still had to obey the mother country;

d to restrict itself to concealing its influence in the provincial mblies and especially the townships where it expanded in

erican society was not yet prepared to accept it with all its ret.

sequences. The educated of New England and the wealthy th of the Hudson exerted for a long time, as I have shown in last chapter, a kind of aristocratic influence which tended to in the exercise of social power in the hands of a few.

:The officers of state were far from being elected, nor was there iversal suffrage. Everywhere the right to vote was -restricted thin-specified limits and was dependent upon a property quali- . ation which was low in the North and higher in the South. ·. The American Revolution broke out. The doctrine of the

ereignty of the people came out from the townships and ok over the government. All classes of society commirted emselves to its cause. Battles were fought and victories won

its name untifit became the law of laws. A transformation almost as rapid was completed" in th'e heart society: the law of inheritance finally broke down all local

uences. At the moment when everyone was beginning to perceive is result of the laws and the Revolution, victory had already tonounced for the democratic cause with no turning back. All . wer was, in fact, in its hands; no struggle against it was

rmitted. The upper classes surrendered without uttering a ord, without raising a fist to an evil which was henceforth evitable. What usually happens to fading powers happened to em: self-centeredness gripped their ranks. Since they could not

. rench power from the hands of the peopl.e and since their hatred of the masses was not enough to derive any pleasure from confronting them, their only thought was to win their favors at any cost. The most 9bviously democratic laws were therefore supported by those very men whose interests were bruised by them)n this manner, the upper classes did not arouse

'. the animosity of the people but did accelerate the triumph of the new order of things. Thus something very strange happened:

liiill

DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA

the thrust of democracy proved all the more irresistible in those states where aristocracy had been most deeply rooted.

The state of Maryland, which had been founded by men from the nobility, was the first to declare universal suffrage1 and introduced the most democratic systems into the whole of its government.

When a nation starts to tamper with electoral qualifications, we can anticipate, sooner or later, their complete abolition. That is one of the most unchanging rules governing society: the further the limits.of electoral rights a,;e pushed back, the more we feel the need to push them back. For after each concession, the strength of democracy increases and its demands grow with every new ppwer it gains. The ambition of those left below the level of. qualification is frustrated in proportion to the great qumber of those above it. The exception in the end becomes the rqle; concessions follow each other without respite and the process can be stopped only when universal suffrage is achieved.

At the present time, the principle of the sovereignty of the people has taken all the practical steps the imagination can possibly think of. It has released itself from all those fictions which~urround_it in other countries and it makes its appearance in all shapes and forms according to the demands of the circum- stances. Sometimes the people make laws corporately, as in Athens; sometimes deputies, elected by the votes of all, act as the people's representatives under their watchful eye. there are countries where a power which, though to some degree foreign to the body of society, influences it and forces· it to advance in a certain direction. Th~re are others where power is divided, being both insic;le and outside the ranks of society.

Nothing like that can be seen in the United States where society acts independently for its own advantage. All power rests in its hands; almost no one would venture to imagine or, still less, voice the idea of seeking power elsewhere. The people share in the making of its laws through their choice of legislators and in the implementation of those laws by the election of the members of the executive. It may almost be said that the people

I. Amendments made to the constitution of Maryland in 1801 and 1809.

ESSITY OF EXAMINING INDIVIDUAL STATES

self-governing in so far as the share left to the administrators so weak and so restricted and the latter fed su~h close ties tli their popular origin and the power from wh1c~ it emanates.

people reign in the American political world hke God o~er universe. It is. the cause and aim of all thin~s, everythmg es from them and everything is absorbed m them. (See

pendix H, p. 842.)

CHAPTER 5

THE NECESSITY OF EXAMINING WHAT HAPPENS IN INDIVIDUAL

STATES 'BEFORE CONSIDERING THE UNION AS A WHOLE

the following chaper, I propose to examine the. form of . vernment in America which is founded on the prmc1ple of the vereignty of the people, the ways in w~ch it proceeds, the stacles i(!neets, and its advantages and nsks. .

·· The first difficulty stems from the complexity of the Umted tes' constitution, where two distinct social gr?ups are locked

· d, as it were, fitted into each other. We observe two completdy parate and a1most iridependent govern~ents, one ~h.ich

· swers the ordinary daily needs of society without clear hm1ta- . ons the other which acts in exceptional circumstances to ~eet

rtain general concerns with very clear limitations. In,~ wo.rd, ere exist twenty-four small sovereign nation states which hnk gether to form the body of the Union.

· To examine the Union before the state is to follow a '?ad rewn with obstacles. The federal governme11t m the Umted tates was the last to take shape, being a variation or ~ummary : the political principles of the repu?lic which was widespread n society and had an existence of its own before the federal

vernment came into being. Moreover the federal. governmen~, · s I have just sdid, is the exception whereas 'that bf the state 1s the rule. The writer who would display the whole of such a

DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA

.Hence, political jurisdiction in the United .States exercises upon the progress of society an'influence all the more extensive as it seems less formidable. It has no qirect effect on the governed but it• does make the majority wholly masters of those who govern. It does not grant the legislature some immense power to use only at a time of crisis; rather, it ,allows it to claim a moderate and steady power to use every day. While the force of it is smaller, it is more convenient to use and easier to"abuse.

By preven~ing·political courts from pr:mouncing judicial pen- alties, Amencans seem to me to· have thus-provided against the most terrible cqnsequences of legal tyranny, rather than tyranny ,,tsdf. Everythmg considered, I wonder whether political juris- d1cnon as understood in the United States, is not the most fearsome weapon ever lodged in the hands of the majority. Once the American republics begin to degenerate, I believe we shall easily recognize that to be so; it will be enough to notice whether the number of political judgments increases. (See Appendix N, p, 846.)

CHAPTER 8

THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION

Up to this point, I have examined each state as if it were a complete whole and have demonstrated the various forces the nation sets in motion along with the methods it employs. But all these states I have considered as independent are nevertheless obliged, in certain ca.ses, to obey a superior authority, that of the Union. Now is the time to scrutinize that part of sovereign power which has been granted to the Union and to take a swift look over the federal constitution. 1•

I. See the text of the federal constitution.

!!. FEDERAL CONSTITUTION

HISTORICAL REVIEW OF THE FEDERAL

CONSTITUTION

Origin of the first Union-Its weakness-Congress appeals · to the constituent power-Space of two years between this · time antl the promulgation of the new constitution.

he thirteen colonies' which simultaneously sloughed off-the · ke. of England at the close of the last century had, as I have . ready stated, the same religion, language, customs, and near

ough the same,laws; •they battled against a common enemy; ey.must, therefore, have had strong reasons for uniting closely ith eacll:other and for merging into one and the same nation, But each of them, having enjoyed a separate existence and a vernment to suit its size, had formed its own peculiar concerns

nd ways of operating. Each of them revolted against a solid · d complete union which would have submerged its individual

portance beneath a federal importance. As a result, two tend- cies followed: one ,which induced the Anglo-Americans to

nite, the other to separate. .. As long as the war with t~e mother country lasted, necessit_Y

rolonged the principle of union. And, although the laws constl- ting-this unionb were defective, the link continued in spite of em.2 But from the moment peace was declared, the defects of the islation stood revealed: the state seemed to dissolve all at

nee. Each colony became an independent republic and assumed s own absolute sovereignty. The federal government, con-

. emned to weakness by its very constitution, and no longer · ustained by the feeling of public danger, witnessed the outrages one to its flag by the great nations of Europe while it was

llnable to drum up sufficient resources to confront the Indian tribes or to pay the interest on debts incurred during the War of

See the articles of the first confederation formed in 1778. This federal constitution was not adopted by all the states until r78r. See also the analysis of this constitution in numbers 15-22 inclusive of The Federalist and that of Mr Story in his Commentaries on the ·Constitution of the UnitedStates,pp. 85-115.

DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA

Independence. On the verge of disintegration, it chose officially to declare its weakness and to appeal to the constituent authority.3

If ever America showed itself capable of rising for a few moments to that lofty degree of renown which the proud imagin- ation of its inhabitants would constantly wish to reveal to us, it was at that supreme time when the national authority had just in some way abdicated its dominion.

The spectacle of a nation battling vigorously to achieve its independence is one which every century has displayed to our eyes. Moreover, the descriptions of Americans' efforts to slip from under the English yoke have been greatly exaggerated. Separated by 2,800 miles of sea from their enemies, aided by a powerful ally, the United States owed victory more to their geographical position than to the courage of their armies or to the patriotism of their citizens. Whoever would dare to compare the American war to the wars of the French Revolution or the efforts of the Americans to ours when France, exposed to attacks from the whole of Europe, penniless, without credit or allies, hurled a twentieth of her population before her advancing enemies, snuffing out with one hand the fire which gnawed at her innards while with the other brandishing the torch around her? But what is new in the history of societies is the sight of a great nation, warned by its legislators that the workings of government are grinding to a halt, turning its attention, without haste or fear, upon itself, sounding out the depths of the ill, standing still for two whole ye;ars in order to uncover the remedy at leisure and, on discovery of the remedy, submitting to it voluntarily without its costing humanity a single tear or a drop of blood.

When the inadequacy of the first federal constitution was perceived, the outburst of political passion prompted by the Revolution was somewhat calmed down and all the great men it had created were still alive. That proved a twin blessing for America. The assembly which was responsible for the drafting

3. Congress made this declaration on 2.1 February 1787.

133 FEDERAL CONSTITUTION

. . though small in number; contained e seco~d cons~t~nonblest characters that ha"d ever emerged

finest mmds an t e no . ' resided over it. e New World. Ge?rge Wa~h,~gto::d~aturedeliberation,

, is national commiss,on, a er ongh body of organic laws f h P

ie's 'acceptance t e . . ered or t e peo U . All the states adopted it ,n ich currently governs the mo~.took up office in 1789 after n.' The new federal govern;: American Revolution. ended, interregnum of two years. . · efore, exactly when ours was begmnmg.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE

FEDERAL CONSTITUTION

"' h ~ d l vernment and the ivision of powers between t e =i=~h;;eneral rule, the states-State government rem .

federal government is the exceptwn.

. h Americans had to confront was how to primary d,fficu)ty t e that the various states forming the are out sovereignty so h I m· everything to do with

. d to govern t emse ves d nio~ connnue . . th ut the whole nation, represente eir internal pro_spenty wi o; entity or ceasing to supply the

y the Union, losmg its corporate I question which was eneral needs of all. This was a comp ex

.. ard ;o r~solve.. fix. advance precisely and completely, • It was !Il1possible to m , ch of the govern- the share of authority which was to go to ea

ents dividing the sovereignty. . f . , l'f , d

f detail o a nation s i e. Who coul otese_e every deral overnment-were simple The duties and nghts of thbe fe h g Union had been created

and relatively easy to de~ne ecause_t egreat general needs. The h . pondmg to certam h d wit a view to res nts on the other an ,

duties and rights of the state governme ,

4.

5.

It had only fifty-five members, including Washington, Madison, Hamilton,

and the Morrises. d . The people appointed deputies It was not the legislators who adopte ~~· debates about the new consti- for this sole purp_ose. There we:e scare mg tution in each of these assemblies.

r34 DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA

were many and complicated because these governments were involved in every detail of social life.

Therefore, a careful definition of the attributes of the federal government was drawn up along with a declaration that what- ever was not included within it returned to the jurisdiction of the state governments. Thus, the state government remained the general rule and the federal government the exception.'

But since it was anticipated that in practical terms questions could arise relating to the precise limits of this exceptional authoriry and that it would have been risky to leave the resol- ution of such questions to ordinary courts instituted in the various states by the states themselves, a FederafSupreme Court' was created to be a unique_tribunal, one of whose prerogatives was to maintain the division of power between the two govern- ments exactly as the constitution had established it. 8

6. See amendments to the federal constitution; The Federal~t, no. 32.; Story, 'p. 7n; Kent's Commentaries on American Law, vol. 1, p. 364. Note, too, that every time the constitution has not reserved for Congress the exdusive right to regul~te certain matters, the states may do so before Congress sees fit to begm. Example: Congress has the right to make a general law about bankruptcy but does not do so; each state drafts one of its own. Moreover, that point was established only after argument before the courts. It is simply a legal decision.

7. The action of this court is indirect, as we shall see later. 8. This is how no. _45 of The Federalist explains the division of sovereignty

between the Umon and e-ach individual state: "The powers delegated by the proposed constitution to the federal government," it says, "are few and defined. Th6se which are to remain in the state governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce;{ ... ] !hepow~sreservedcotheseveralStateswillixtendtoalltheobjectswhich, m ~e ordmary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties[ . .. ] and pros- pe.nty of the State." I shall often have occasion to quote The Federalist in this work. When the draft law, which has since become the constitution of the United States, was still before the people and submitted for their adoption, three men, already famous and later to become even more so- John Jay, Hamilton, and Madison-associated together with the object of pointing out to the nation the advantages of the plan submitted to it. With this intention they published in the form of a journal a series of articles which together represent a complete treatise. They gave their journal the name of The Federalist, and that name is used for the book.

Th~ Federalist is a fi~e. book which, although it particularly concerns Amenca, should be familiar to statesmen of all countries.

THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION

POWERS "OF THE FED)lRAL GOVERNMENT

Power granted to federal government to make war and peace and to levy general taxes-Internal political strategies within its sphere of action-The government

of the Union more centralized in certain respects than the royal government under the old

French monarchy.

r35

Nations in relation to each otl1er are•but single units. A nation needs a single government above all to give it the advantage when dealing with foreigners.

Therefore, the right to declare peace and war was granted exclusively to the Union along with the. concludmg of ~ommer- cial treaties, levying of armies, and eqmppmg of fleets.

The necessiry of having a national government does not become such an imperative when it comes to the management of the internal affairs of sociefy. .

However, certain general concerns can only be dealt with under a general apthoriry.

The right to regulate everything relating to the value of mo~ey was left to the Union; it was responsible for ,the postal s_erv'.ce, it was given the right to open the main lines of commumcat10n which'were to unite the various areas of the country.•• .

In general, the authoriry in the differ~nt states was com1~ered free within its own sphere; however, 1t could abuse this mde- pendence and take unwise measures whiclr could damage the securiry of the Union as a whole. In such rare cases, ~ell-defined in advance the federal government was allowed to mtervene m the intern;! affairs of the states.11 In this way, while appreci- ating that all federated republics might modify or alter their

9. See section g of the constitution; nos 41 and 42. of The Federalist; Kent's Commentaries, vol. 1, p. 2.07ff; and Story, pp. 358-82., 409-2.6. . .

10 • There are several other rights of this kind such as bankru?tcy legislation

and the granting of patents. It is easy to see what made 1t necessary for the Union as a whole to intervene in these matters.. .

II. Even in this case, its intervention is indirect. The Umon intervenes through the courts, as we shall see later.

:z..po DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA

to have created a federal constitution which II h 'h d · aowstemto

P W:,t. :tan hsenhous hwars but to profit from such a geographical

SI mn t at t ey ave none to fear. No one can appreciate more than m self the ad

the federal system which I hold to b y f h vantages of d . eoneo t emostpow f I ev1ces to. promote human prosperity and freedom I en er u

lot of nations which have been allowed to adopt i~ Bu:1° the r~~uctant to believe that. confederated nations could .fight fo:~

g trme on equal footmg against a nation with a centralized government. -

E The n~~o.~:;hich, faced by the great military monarchies of urope, iv,. its sovereignty, would appear, in my opinion

to dbe forsakmg by this very act its power and possibly its !if~ an reputation.

What an admirable position the New W Id . h h or enioys t at man Ii:: ~:~;~ 0 °!;{i::~~ies than himself. To be happy and free, he

PART 2

So far I have examined the institutions, perused the written laws, and described th~ present-day form of the political sociery of the United States.

Yet above all the institutions and beyond all the forms, there exists thi;,_sovereign power of the people which destroys or modifies them at will.

'It remains for me to show along which paths this power which regulates the laws proceeds; what inner feelings and passions it possesses; what hidden springs drive it on or hold it back or direct its irresistible progress; what, are the results of its unbounded force; and what destiny lies in store for it.

CHAPTER I

WHY IT CAN BE FIRMLY STATED THAT IN THE UNITED STATES IT IS

THE PEOPLE WHO GOVERN

In America the people appoint the lawmakers and the executive; they form the jury which punishes breaches of the law. Not only are institutions democratic in principle but,also in their consequences; thus the people directly nominate their represen- tatives and, as a general rule, choose them annually so as to hold them more completely dependent. Therefore, in reality it is the people who rule. Although they have a representative government, it is quite clear that the opinions, bias, concerns,

t '

202

and even the passions of th 1 DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA

obstacles preventing_them f:opeop e can encounter no lasting ence upon the conduct of socie:.exerc1smg a day-to-day influ-

Iu the United States, as in an con the majori~ governs in the nam: of rh:try ru:ed by the people,

The _ma1onry is chiefly made u peop e. . . our of mclination or self . p of peaceable Citizens who country. They are surro~~t~~t, smcerely seek the good of th; parties which attempt t d e thy the constant agitation of those

o raw em m d 1. h . an en 1st t e1r support.

CHAPTER z

PARTIES IN THE UNITED STATES

An important distinction to b de Parties which behave to each e ma . between pa~ties-

Parties properly so-ca//ed-Diffe~: ltke rival naNons- S/ntJ/1 parties-Their ori i ce between large and

characteristics-A . h g ns-Their diverse I mertca as had gr t . anger has any-Fed 1· ' ea parties-It no

era zsts -Repub/' b Federalists-Difficulty of fa . tca1:5 -:-Defeat of the States-How th rmtng parties tn the United

ey manage to do -A . . democratic features •ou d . II so . rtstocrat,c or

, , n tn a parttes-Stru l f General Jackson' ar:ainst the bank. gg e o

' I should first establish an im ortan . . . . Some countries aare -so la;' e th: d1vmo:' between parties.

livmg there have confl' r· . g t the different populations h ic mg mterests alth h h t e same sovereign governme t Th. oug t ey unite under

of oppo~ition. The several secr7o~s o~srJ:'oduces a perpetual state tnte, strictly speaking di t· . e nation therefore consti- ties and, if civu' war :,,e:e 1tnctbnatk10ns rather, than political par- . l . o rea ontthe fli.

nva nat10ns rather th ' con ct is between . an a struggle b h•• . co!l11llumry. e,ween, sect10ns of the

But whenever citizens have conf]· . h . h. ICtmg . . w ic mterestallareasofthe l op1mons on issues

country a ike, such as, for instance '

ARTIES IN THE UNITED STATES 203

e general principles of government, then you will see the appearance qf what I may correctly term parties.

Parties are a fundamental defect of £tee governments but they do not at all times share the same character or the same instincts.

At certain periods, nations may feel oppressed by such intoler- able evils that th.e idea of totally altering their political consti-_

· tution comes into their minds. At other perio.ds the disease is · deeper still and.the whole social fabric itself is endangered. Such is a period of widespread revolution and of great parties.

Between the centuries of misery and disorder there are others when societies come to rest and the human race seems to .draw

. breath. In acrual fact, such times are more apparent than real. Time does not arrest its course for nations any more than for men; both move forward daily toward an unknown future. When we think things are stationary, it is because we fail to see their movements. Men who move at a walk:ing pace appear stationary to those who are running.

Bowever that may be, some pl!Fiods occut when the changes taking place in the political constitution and the so_cial structure of nations appear so slow and imperceptible that men think they have reached a_final state.,The human mind, believing itself to be firmly based upon sure foundations, does not seek to look beyond its set horizon.

This is a time of intrigues and smalrparties, What I term great political parties are those committed to

principles rather than their consequences, to general consider- ations rather than to individual cases, to ideas and not to men. These parties generally have more noble characteristics, more generous enthusiasms, more genuine convictions, a more open and bold approach than the others. In such parties, private interest, which always plays the most significant parrjn,political passions, is concealed more skillfully beneath the veil of public interest. It sometimes manages to remain unobserved by those very people it inspires into action.

On the other hand, small parties_generally lack ,any political credo. Since they do not feel elevated or sustained by lofty purposes, their character is imbued with a selfishness which obviot1sly colors each of their, actions. They always .flare up

DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA

CHAPTER 5

GOVE~NMENT BY DEMOCR°ACY IN AMERICA

I realize that I am treadin r . d this chapter is bound to b g ?n ive cm ers. Every single word in which divide my country r;:;se at;~me pomt the different parties

h In Europe we find it diffi~:i:\: ;::1s:ht~~~!eakrythoughts. t e -permanent instincts of democrac b ue c aracter and

r!p:i:di~"!::i~~e:~~e in_ co~fll ict;hit is :o;;:;~:;fy !~:~: he:: prmc1p es t emselves t th .

aro'Ised by the conflict. or o e passions

This is not the case in Am · h unimpeded dominance with :~1~a w ere_ the people are in an avenge. angers to fear nor wrongs to

Therefore, in America, democra f 11 . nations Its b h · · cy O ows its own incli-

. e av10r 1s natural and its is where it must be judged And h movements are free. That more useful and interestin. than ':uo would !rnd such a study canied along by an irres f·51 rselves smce we are daily men toward what is l e movement, walking like blind

may prove to be a tyra · h republic, but surely toward ad .' .nny per aps or a emocrat1c soqal state?

UNIVERSAL SUFFRAGE

rh · ad~;;e~r~::::;!~i~::~~~:et ~~~t allJ~e state.s of the Union had. stages on the social ladde; I h ou~ ;n :opulations at different effects in various places . d ave a t e chance to observe its guage, religion, or custo;; tu':'ong races c;,f !?en whom !an- other, in Louisiana as well . Nmt0Ev1rtul al st~angers to-each

C . asm ew ngand G . .

anada. I have noted th t . , m eorg1a as m producing in America all ~heu~1ver~al suffrage "'.as far from from it in Europe and that it e~e ts or. all the ills expected is supposed. s resu ts were m !leneral other than

GOVERNMENT BY OBMOCRACY IN AMERICA

THE PEOPLE'S CHOICE AND THE INSTINCTS a°F

AMERICAN DEMOCRA°CY IN ITS CHOICES

In the United States the most .outstanding men are rarely called upon to direct public affairs-Reasons for this-The envy which, in France, drives the lower classes against the

upper classes is ndt a Frenc/i instinct but a democratic one-Why, in America, eminent men often keep away from

a political career of their own volition.

· Many people in Europe believe without saying so, or say so without believing it, that one of the great advantages of universal suffrage is to summon. men worthy of public trust to the direc- tion of public affairs. The people could not possibly govern on their own, so it is said, but they do always sincerely support the welfare of the state and their instinct unfailingly tells them which men are fired by a similar desire and thus are the most competent

to wield power. For my part, I am bound to say, what I have seen in America

does not give me any reason to think that this is the case. When I stepped ashore in the United States, I discovered with amazement to what extent merit was common among the gov- ernep but rare among the rulers. It is a permanent feature of the present day that the most outstanding men in the United States are rarely summoned to public office and one is forced to acknowledge that things .have been like that as democracy has gone beyond its prFious limits.,The race of American statesmen has strangely shrunk in size over the last half-century.

One can point out several reasons for this-phenomenon. Whatever one does, it is impossible to raise the intelligence of

a nation above a certain level. It will be quite useless to ease the access to human knowledge, improve teaching methods, or reduce the cost of ,education, for men will never become edu- cated nor develop their intelligence witl,out devoting time to

the matter. Therefore the inevitable limitations upon a nation's.intellec-

tual progress are governed by· how great or small is the ease with which it can live without working. This limitation is further

I I '

--R-- -

DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA

off in certain countries and nearer in others; for it not to exist at all, however, the people would need to be free of the physical cares of life. It would have to cease to be the people. Thus it is as difficult to imagine a society where all men are enlightened as a state where all the citizens are wealthy; those are two related difficukies. ·J willingly accept that the bulk of the population very smcerely supports the welfare of the country; I might go even further to state that in general the lower social classes seem to be less likely to confuse their personal interests with this support than the upper classes. But what they always lack, more or l_ess, is the skill to judge the means to achieve this sincerely desired end. A long study and many different ideas indeed are ?ee~ed to reach a precise picture of the character of one single md1v1dual! Would the masses succeed where greatest geniuses go astray? The people never find the time or the means to devote to this work. They have always to come to hasty judgments and to latch on to the most obvious of features. As a result, charlatans of all kinds know full well the secret of pleasing the people whereas more often than not their real friends fail to doso.

Moreover, it is not always the ability to choose men of merit which democracy lacks but the desire and inclination to do so.

One must not blind oneself to the fact that democratic insti- tutions ,promote to a very high degree the feeling of envy in the hum~n heart, not so much because they offer each citizen ways of hem~ equal to each other but because these ways continuously prove madequate for those who use them. Democratic insti- tutions awaken and flatter the passion of equality without ever b~ing able to satisfy it entirely. This complete equality every day shps through the people's fingers at the moment when they think they have a hold on it; it flees, as Pascal says,.in an eternal flight. The people become excited by the pursuit of this blessing, all the more priceless -because it is near enough to be recognized but too far away to be tasted. The chance of success enthuses them; the uncertainty of success frustrates them. Their excite- ment is followed by weariness and bitterness. So anything which exceeds their limitations in any way appears to them as an

GOVERNMENT BY DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA

obstacle to their <;Iesires and all superiority, however legitimate,

is irksome to their eyes. Many people suppose that this secret instinct which persuades

the lower classes to remove the upper classes as far as they ca:1 from the direction of affairs is found only in Fran_ce_; that 1s wrong. The instinct I am mentioning is no_t Fre:1ch, 1t 1s demo- cratic; political circumstances ma! have g1~en 1t a particularly bitter taste but they do not bring 1t mto bemg.

In the l,J~ted States, the people have no especial _hatred for the upper classes of society; but they feel little goodwill for them and exclude them from power; they do not fear great talents but have'little liking for them. Generally speaking, it is noticeable that anything which thrives without their support has trouble

in winning their favor. While the natural instincts of democracy persuade the people

to remove distinguished men from power, the latter are g~1~ed by no less an instinct to distance themselves. from_ a polmcal career, where it is so difficult for them to retam their _complete autonomy or to make any progress without cheapening them- selves. This thought is very naively expressed by Chancell;ir Kent.' This celebrated author I speak of, having sung ~he praises of that part of the constitution which grants the app~mtment of judges to the executive power, adds: "It is probable, m fact, that the most appropriate men to fill these places would h~ve too much reserve in their manners and too much seventy m their principles ever to be able to gather the majority of votes at an election that rested on universal suffrage." (Kent's Commen- taries on American Law, vol. 1, P· 273.) . . .

That was what was being printed without contradiction m

America in the year 1830. I hold it proved that those who consider universal suffrage as

a guarantee of the excellence of the choice made are under a complete delusion. Universal suffrage has other advantages but

not that one.

'

I

,86 DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA

skillful administration but it ensures what the most skillful administration is often too powerless to create, namely to spread through the whole social community a restless activity, an over- abundant force, an energy, which never exists without it and which, however unfavorable the circumstances, can perform wonders. Therein lie its real advantages. ·

In this century, when the fate of the Christian world appears to hang in the balance, some hasten to attack democracy as a hostile power as it is still growing; others already worship it as a new god emerging from the void. But both know the object of their hatred or desire only· imperfectly; they fight in the dark and strike out at random.

What are you requiring of society and its government? One inust be clear about that.

Do you wish .to raise the human mind to a certain lofty and generous manner of viewing the things of this world? Do you wish to inspire in men a kind of scorn for material possessions?

Is it your desire to engender or foster deep convictions and 1:0 prepare the way for acts of deep devotion?

Is your main concern to refine manners, to raise behavior, to cause the arts to blossom? Do you crave poetry, reputation, glory?

Are you intending to organize a nation so that it will exercise strength of purpose over all others? Are you giving it the aim of undertaking mighty projects and leaving an impressive mark upon history, howevei; its efforts turn out?

If, in your estimation, that should be the main objective of social man, do not choose a democratic government because it would not steer you to that goal with any certainty.

But, if it seems useful to you to divert man's intellectual and moral activity upon the necessities of physical life and use.it to foster prosperity; if you think that reason is more use to men than genius; if you aim to create not heroic virtues but peaceful habits; if you prefer to wimess vice rather than crime and to find fewer splendid deeds provided you have fewer transgressions; if, instead of moving through a brilliant society, you are satisfied to live in a prosperous one; if, finally, in·your view, the main objective for a. government is not to give the whole nation as

THE MAJORITY IN THE UNITED STATES IS ALL-POWERFUL

much strength.or glory as possible but to obtain for each of the individuals who make it up as much wellbeing as possible, while avoiding as much suffering as one can, "then make social conditions equal and set up a democratic government.

If, however, there is not enough time to make a choice and a force beyond man's control is already carrying you along, regardless of your wishes, toward one of these two governments, at least seek to derive from it all the good it can do. And, aware of its good instincts as well as its unfortunate leanings, make every effort to restrict the consequences of the latter while promoting the former.

CHAPTER 7

THE MAJORITY IN THE UNITED STATES IS ALL-POWERFUL AND, THE

CONSEQUENCES OF THAT

Natural strength of the majority in democracies-Mpst American constituttons have artificially increased this

natural strength-How-Pledged delegates-Moral power of the majority-View ef its infallibility-Respect for its

rights-What increases it in the United States.

It is the very essence of democratic government that the power of the majority should be absolute, for in democracies nothing outside the majority can keep it in check.

Most American constitutions have further sought to increase this natural strength of the majority by ar~ificial means.'

Of all political powers, the legislature obeys mo~t readily the will of the majority. Americans have decided' that members of

I. We saw, when we were looking at the federal constitution, that the Union legislators had made great efforts to counteract thjs. The result of these efforts has been to make the federal government more independent in its own sphere than that of the states~ But the federal government scarcely ever concerns itself with anything but foreign affairs; it is the state govern- ments that are in real control of American society. ,

288 DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA

the legislature should be appointed directly by the people and for' a very' brief term of office, so as to force them to bow not only to general ,public"Upinion but'also to the passing passions of their constituents.

The members of.both houses have been chosen from the same class and appointed in the same way; the conseq~ence of this is that the deliberations of the legislative body:are almost.as swifr as and no less irresistible than those ofa single assembly .•

Having constituted the legislature in this way; almost all the powers of government have been concentrated in its hands.

At the same time as the law increllsed the strength of naturally powerful authorities, it increasingly weakened those that were by nature weak. It granted the representatives of the executive neither stability nor independence and, by subordinating them completely to the whims of the legislature, it deprived them of what little influence democratic government.might have allowed them to exert.

In ~everai states, the majority elected the judicial authorities and in all states the latter depended in a way upon the power of the legislature whose representatives annually settled the judges' salaries.

Custom has furthered this process beyond what the law demanded. ·

Increasingfy in the United States ,one habit is gaining ground which will, in the end, nullify'the guarantees of ~epresentative government: very frequently the electors, having elected their d;legate, will lay down a plan of b~ha;ior and will impose upon him' a certain number of positive COII)mitments he could in no way avoid, ~t is as if the majprity itself, quite near to breaking into aTabble, were arguihg its case in the marketplace.

In America, several special circumstances still tend to make the_ power of the majority not mere]1 all-powerful but also irresistible.

The moral ascendancy of the majority is partly founded upon the idea that more enlightenment and wisdom 'are found in a group of men than in one man alone and that the number of legislators counts for more than who is elected. This is the theory of equality applied to intelligence and is a doctrine which attacks

THE MAJORITY IN THE UNITED STATES IS ALL-POWERFUL

man's pride in its final hiding place; for that reason, the minority admits it reluotantly but gets used·to it ohl:r after ft long whi)e. Like all powers, and possibly more than •any other;.that of the majority needs, therefore, to last a long time.to appearlegiti- mate. In the eflrly stages, it commands obedience by constraint; only·.after living, under the law, for a long period of, time do people begin to respect it.

The concept of.the right of tbe majority to,govern•society, based on enlightenment, was brought to the United States byfrs first inhabitants. :rhis idea, which alone would ·be enough to create ·a free nation, has today passed into common usage and appears.even in the slightest habits of life.

The French, under the old monarchy, took it as read that the king could do no·wrong and that whenever he acted badly, the blame should be laid at the door of his advisers. This made obedience w_ongerfully simple. One could grumble against the law while continuing to love and respect the legislator. i\n;>eri- cans hold the same opinion of the majority:

The moral authority of the majority is also founded upon the principle that the interests of the greatest number must take precedence over those of the smallest. Now, it is readily under- stood that the respect 'professed for the right of the greatest

· number naturally grows or shrinks according to .the ~tate of the parties. When a .nation is ,divided between severaLgreat irreconcilable interests, the privilege of the majority is often disregarded because it becomes too burdensome to submit to it.

If there existed a class of AmericalJ citizens wliich the legisla- tor was striving,to strip of certain exclusive advantages which they had enjoyed for centuries, and wanted to bring them down from their elevated station to join the ranks of the crowd, this minority would·probably not submit easily to his laws.

But, since the United States is peopled by men equal to each other, there is still n'o natural or permanent antagonism between the interests ofahe different inhabitants.

There is a state of society in which the members of•a minority _can never hope ~to wjn over the majority because, to do so, would entail the abandonment of the very object of the struggle they are waging against it. For example, an ,aristocracy could

DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA

never become a majority as well as preserve its exclusive privileges and it could never let go· of its privileges without ceasing to be an aristocracy.

In the United States political questions cannot be framed in such -a general or absolute fashion and all parties are ready to acknowledge the rights of the majority because they are all hoping to be able one day to exercise them to their own advantage.

Hence the majority in- the United States possesses immense actual power and a power of opinion almost as great; and when it has once made up its mind over a question, there are, so to speak, no obstacles which might, I will not say halt, but even retard its onward course long enough to allow it time to heed the complaints of those it crushes.as it goes by.

The consequenc~s of this state of affairs are dire and danger- ous for the future.

HOW IN AMERICA THE OMNIPOTENCE OF THE

MAJORITY INCRE,ASES THE LEGISLA:r!VE AND

ADMINISTRATIVE INSTABILITY NATURAL TO

DEMOCRACIES

How the Americans increase the instability of the legislature which is natural to democracies by changing their

legislators annually and by arming them with almost limitless power-The same effect felt in -the

administration-In America social improvements are promoted by an infinitely greater yet less co~sistent drive

than in Europe.

I have previously mentioned the defects natural to democratic government and not a single one of them fails to increase along with the growing power of the majority.

To begin with the most powerful of all: the instability of the legislature is an inbuilt weakness of democratic government because it is in the nature of democracies to bring fresh faces to power. But this weakness is greater or less according •to the power and means of action granted to the legislator.

In America, sovereign power is invested in the legislative

THE MAJORITY IN THE UNITED STATES IS ALL-POWERFUL

authority, which can then carry out any of its wishes swifrly_and without opposition; every year it is.given new representanves. This means that precisely that combination has been adopted which most favors democratic instability and allows democracy to apply to the most important issues its ever changing wishes.

Thus America is today the one country in the world where laws last for the least time .. Almost all American constitutions have been amended over the last thirty years. Every American state has therefore altered the basis of its laws during that period. , , .

As for the laws themselves, a glance over the various state archives is all you need to be convinced that the activities ·of the American legislator never slow down. Not that American democracy is of its nature more unstable than any other but it has, in the making of its laws, been allowed to follow the natural instability of its inclinations. 2

The omnipotence of the majority and the swift and absolute manner of the execution of its will in the United States not only increase the instability of the law but also have the same effect on the enactment of the law and the activity of public adminis- tration.

Since the only authority one wishes to please is the majority, all its projects are supported with enthusiasm; but as soon as its attention is drawn elsewhere, all effort comes to an end, whereas in all the free states of Europe where administrative authoriry enjoys an independent existence and a stable position, the wishes of the legislator continue to be executed even when he is otherwise occupied.

In America, a great deal more enthusiasm and energy are spent on certain improvements than would be spent elsewher~.

In Europe, an infinitely smaller but more consistent force 1s used on these same matters.

2.. The legislative acts passed by the state of Massachusetts alone from the •year I780 to the present time alrea?y fill three huge ~olu~es. We have also to note that the collection to which I allude was revised m I 8:z. 3 when many old laws which had fallen into disu~e were ~et aside. Now the state of Massachusetts, which has a populanon no bigger than a French departement, may be considered as the most sta?le in ~e ~tire Unio~ and the one which shows the most prudence and wisdom m its undertakings.

DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA

monarchies.of Euroge. So I do not suppose that w~akness will cause its downfall!

If ever freedom is lost in America, blame will have to be laid at the door of the omnipotence of the majority, which will have driven minorities to_des11air and will have forced them to appeal to physical force. Then one will see anarchy which. will come as a consequence ·of despotism.

President James Madison has expressed these same thoughts. (See The Federalist, no. 51.)

"It is of great importance in a republic, not only to guard the society against the pppression of its rulers, but ro guard one part of the society against the injustice of the 'other part.· Justice is the end of government. It is the end of civil society. It ever has been, and ev;,r will be, pursued until it be obtained, or until liberty be lost in the pursuit. In a society, under the forms of which the stronger faction can· readily unite and oppress the weaker, anarchy may a~ truly be said to reign as in a state of nature, where the weaker individual is not secured against the violence· ,of the stronger: and as, in the latter state, even the stronger individuals are prompted by the uncertainty of their condition to submit to a government which may protect the weak as well as themselves, so, in the former state, will the more powerful factions be gradually induced by a like motive to wish for a government which will prc1tect all partie\ the weaker as well as the more powerful. It can be little doubted, that, if the state of Rhode Island was separated from the Confederacy and left to itself, the insecl/rity of rights under the popular form of government within such narrow limits would be displayed by such reiterated op'pressions of factious majorities, that some power altogether' independent of the people would soon be· called for by the' voice of the very factions whose misrule had proved·the necessity of it."

Jefferson also said: "The executive in our government is not the sole, it is scarcely the principal object· of my jealousy. The

6. I am supposing that is unnCCessary to warn the reader that, in this instance, as in the rest of the chapter, I am speaking not of the federal government but of the individual governments of each state which are directed tyran- nically by the majority.

WHAT MODERATES THE-TYRANNY OF THE MAJORITY

tyranny of the legislators is the most formidab~e dread at pre~e~t, d .ll be for long years. That of the executive will c;.ome m its anw1 .d,,7

turn but,it will be at a remote peno . rn'rhis matter I pref er to quote Jefferson to anyone else because

I regard him as the most powerful apostle democracy has ever

had.

CHAPTER 8'

WHAT MODERATES THE TYRANN_Y o·p THE MAJORITY IN THE

UNITEb STATES

ABSENCJ! OF ADMINISTRATIVE

CENTRALIZATION

The majority does not intend to do everything-It is . obliged to use the magistrates of.the to~ships and counties

to execute its sovereign wishes.

I have previous1y mad~ a_ distinction betw~n two types -"! ~entralization; t~e one called governmental,_ the other adm1ms

trative. Im The first exist~ solely in America; the second is a ost

unknown. . . h d b h th If the directing authority in American so~1et1es a. ot ese

means of government available and combined the nght ?f t~tal command with the capacity and habit of total execut10n, if, after establishing 'the principles of government. on a general level, it descended to the very details of apphcah?n, and,. after regulating the country's affairs on a grand scale,_ it could extend event~ the affairs of individuals, freedom would soon be obliter-

ated from the New World. . h ft h . . d S h · 1·ty wh1c o en as But, m the Umte tates, t e maior ,

7· Letter from Jefferson to Madison, 15 March 1789.

II

306 DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA

despotic tastes-and instincts, still lacks the most developed tools of tyranny.

In none of the American republics has the central government ever been occupied with anything but a small number of matters whose importance attracts its attention. It has not undertaken the regulation of society's secondary affairs. There is n,;rhing to indicate it has even conceived the wish to do so. As the majority has become increasingly absolute, it has not enlarged the powers of the central authority; it has only made it. omnipotent in its own sphere of action. Thus .tyranny-can be a burden at one point but could not extend to all points of influence.

Besides, however much the national majority may-be driven by its passions, however enthusiastically it pursues its plans, it could not, in the same way, in every location, make all the citizens bow to its wishes at the same moment. When the central gbvernment which represents it issues a sovereign command, it has to rely for the execution of its orders upon agents who often do not depend upon it and who cannot be given minute by minute directions. As a result, municipal bodies and county administrations form so many hidden reefs which hold back or separate the flood of the people's will. Were the law to be oppressive, freedom would soon discover a means of protection in its method of executing this law. The majority could not possibly go into every detail nor, dare I say, into the trivialities of administrative tyranny. Indeed it does not imagine it could do so, for_it does not possess total awareness of its own power. It still knows only its own natural forces and is unaware how far skill could extend its scope. . Ir. is worth thinking about this point. If a democratic republic,

s1m1lar to that of the United States, ever came to be founded in a country where the power of one man had already established a central administration and made it accepted by habit and law, I have no hesitation in saying that, in such a republic, tyranny would be less tolerable than in any of the absolute monarchies of Europe. You would need to go to Asia to find anything with which to compare it.

WHAT MODERATES THE TYRANNY OP THE MAJORITY

THE ATTITUDE OF THE AMERICAN LEGAL

PROFESSION AND HOW IT ACTS AS A

COUNTERBALANCE TO DEMOCJl'ACY

307

The usefulness of examining,what'are the natural tendencies of tbe legal mind-The lawyers summoned to

play an important role in a society struggling into existence-How the type of.work undertaken by-lawyers

gives an aristocratic turn to their ideas-Chance circumstances which may block the development of these

ideas-The ease with which the aristocracy unites with the lawyers-The use a despot could make of lawyers-How lawyers are the only aristocratic element which is naturally

able tb combine with elements natural to demdcracy- Particular causes which tend to give an aristocrQtic turn•to

the English and American legal mind-American aristocracy sits aNhe bar and on the bench-Lawyers'

influence on American society-How their attitudes penetrate the legislature and administration ending up

by giving the nation itself som~thing of the instincts of magistrates.

On visiting Americans and studying their laws, one realizes that the p9wer given to lawyers.and·the influence permitted ~o them in government today form the most potent barner against the excesses of democracy. This result seems to stem from a general cause which it is worth examining for it may recur elsewhere.

Lawyers have been involved in all the movements in Europ~an society for five hundred years, now as tools of the polmcal authorities, now using the political authorities as tools. In the Middle Ages, lawyers offered wonderful cooperation to kings in the, development of their authority which, since that time, they have worked powerfully to restrict. In England they were seen in close union with the aristocracy; in France, they have proved its most dangerous enemies. Do lawyers, therefore, yield only to sudden and temporary impulses or do, they ub~y, '?ore or less according to circumstances, constantly recurring instincts which are natural to them? I should like to clarify this issue for

1,1

Ii '' I ,'!,

:1111

" I '

DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA

apart and of giving hii;n the instincts of the privileged classes. Armed with the right of declaring laws unconstitutional, the

American magistrate intrudes constantly upon political mat- ters.' He cannot compel the people to make laws but, at least, he puts. pressure upon them not to be unfaithful to their own laws and to remain in harmony with themselves.

I am aware that in the United States a tendency exists which leads the people to reduce the power of the judiciary; in most individual state constitutions, the government can remove judges. from office at the request of both houses. Certain consti- tutions have the court judges elected and subject to frequent re-election. I venture to predict that these innovations will have, sooner or later, disastrous results and it will be seen that an attack has been directed against not only the power of judges but against the democratic republic itself.

Besides, one should not think that in the United States the legalistic attitude stays solely within the enclosed world of the courts; it stretches well beyond that. ·

Since lawyers form the only enlightened class not distrusted by the people, they are naturally summoned to hold most public offices. They fill the ranks of the legislature and head the admin- istrations; they exercise, therefore, a great influence over the shaping of the law and its execution. Although lawyers are obliged to yield to the public opinion which draws them along, it is easy to see signs of what they would do, if they were free. Americans who have introduced so many innovations in their political laws have made only slight changes, and those with some reluctance, ,in their civil laws, although several of these laws are flagrantly repugnant to their social state. That is because the majority always has to turn·to lawyers in matters of civil law and American lawyers do not introduce innovation, if the choice is left to them.

For ~ Frenchman, it is very strange to hear the complaint among Americans against the obstructive spirit and prejudices of lawyers in favor of eve_rything established.

1. Sec what I have to say about judicial power in the first volume.

WHAT MODERATES THE TYRANNY OF THE MAJORITY

The influence of the legalistic attitude spreads yet further than the exact boundaries just indicated.

There is hardly a political question in the United States which does not sooner or later turn into a judicial one. From that comes the consequence that parties feel obliged to borrow legal ideas and language when conducting their own daily contro- versies. Since most men in public life are, or have been, lawyers, they apply their own habits and turn of mind to the handling of affairs. Jury service familiarizes all classes with this. Judicial language thus becomes pretty well the language of common speech; the spirit of the law starts its life insid_e schools and courtrooms only to spread gradually beyond their narrow con- fines· it insinuates itself, so to speak, into the whole of society righ; down to the lowest ranks until, finally, the entire nation has caught some of the ways and tastes of the magistrate.

Lawyers in the United States constitute a power which is little feared and hardly noticed; it carries no banner of its own and adapts flexibly to the demands of the time, flowing along unre- sistingly with all the movements of society. Nevertheless it wraps itself around society as a whole, is felt in all social classes, constantly continues to wqrk in secret upon them without their knowing until it has shaped them to its own desires.

THE JURY IN THE UNITED STATES SEEN AS A

POLITICAL INSTITUTION

The jury being one of the instruments of the sovereignty of the people must be closely related to the other laws which

establish this sovereignty-Composition of American juries-Effects of juries on the national character-

Education' it gives to the people-How it tends to establish magistrates' influence and to spread leg~listic attitudes.

Since my subject has naturally led me to talk of American justice, I shall not leave it without considering the jury.

One must make a distinction between the jury as a judicial institution and as a political one.

322 DEMOCRACY IN AMERIC~

he adds the stamp of reason and the law. (See Appendix D, p. 851.)

In England and America judges exercise an influence over the outcome in criminal trials which the French judge has never known. The reason for this difference is easy to understand: the English ·or American magistrate, having -established his auth- ority in civil courts, simply transfers it after that to tribunals of another kind, where it was not first acquired.

There are cases, and often they are the most important, when the American judge has the right to pronounce alone.7 He then finds ·himself oy i:hance in the position normal for a French judge but with much greater moral authority: memories of the jury stilt follow1tim around and his voice assumes almost as much force as that of the society represented b'y those juries.

His influence spreads even well beyond the-enclosed world of the courts-whether in the relaxed atmosphere of private life or in the work of political life, whether in the marketplace or in one of the legislatures, the American judge constantly sees around him men who are accustomed to view his intelligence as something superior to their own. And well after his power has been exercised in deciding cases, it influences the habits of mind and even the very soul of all those who have cooperated with him in judging them.

Thus the jury, which seems to be reducing the rights .of the magistracy, in effect is founding its sway and there is not a single country where judges are as powerful as in those where the people ·take a share in their privileges.

It is especially witli the help of juries in civil i:ases that Ameri- can judges promote what I have called the legalistic attitude, even down to the lowest of the social classes. - Thus the jury, the most energetic method of asserting the

people's rule, is also the most effective method of teaching them how to rule.

7. _Federal judges almost always decide upon only those questions which touch closely uport the goverµment of the country.

CAUSES WHICH TEND TO MAINTAIN A DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC 32,3

CHAPTER 9

THE MAlN CA USES WHICH TEND TO MAINTAIN A DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC

IN THE UNITED STATES

A democratic republic continues in the United States. The main aim of this book has been to elucidate the causes ·of this state of affairs.

·Among the reasons for this, there are severa'.it have mentioned only in passing, or .which the tenor of my subject has drawn me to touch upon unintentionally. Others I have been unable to discuss, while those I have been allowed to deal with at length have been left behind me, as it were buried in the detail of the book.

I have; therefore, thought that, before moving on to speak of the future, I should gather together in a short summary all the reasons which ~'.'plain the present.

In this sort ot synopsis I shall be brief for I shall take care to remind the reader only very cursorily of what he already knows; aJilong the facts.I have not yet had the opportupity to point out, I shall choose only the most important.

In my opinion, all the reasons which tend to maintain a demo- cr~tic republic in rhe United States fall into three categories.

The first is the peculiar and accidental position in which Providence has placed the fynericans; the sec,ond comes from their laws; thethird derives from their usages and customs.

ACCIDENTAL OR .PROVIDENTIAL CAUSES

HELPING TO MAINTAIN A DEMOCRATIC

REPUBLIC IN THE UNITED STATES

The Union has no neighbors-No great capital-The Americans hav~ had the chances of birth in their favor- America is an empty country-Iiow these circumstances

are a powerful influence upon the maintenance of a democratic republic-How the wildernesses of America

11

I ,,

' I

11

DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA

are peopled-The eagerness of Anglo-Americans to take possession of the uninhabited wilds of the New

World-Influence of physical prosperity on American political opinions.

Apart from the will 0£ men, a thousand other circumstances favor a democratic republic in the United States. Some are well known; others easy to reveal. I shall confine myself to the most prominent.

The Americans, have no neighbors and t)ms no great wars, financial crises, devastations, or conquests to dread. They need neither heavy taxes, nor a large army, nor great generals; they have almost nothing to f,ar from that scourge which is more terrible for democratic republics than all these put together, namely, military glory.

How can we deny the incredible influence of military glory on the opinion of a nation? General Jackson, chosen by the Americans rwice as head of their government, is a man of a violent disposition and mediocre ability; nothing in the course of his career has ever proved that he had the necessary qualities to govern a free nation. In addition, the majority of the enlight- ened classes in the Union has always been against him. So, who has placed him upon the President's chair and still keeps hini there? The recollection of a victory he won rwenty years ago beneath the walls of New Orleans; now, that New Orleans victory" was a very commonplace fe;Jt of arms which no one would consider for long except in a country of no battles at all. And the nation which is easily carried away by the prestige of military glory has assuredly to be the coldest, the most calculat- ing, the least militaristic and, if one may put it so, the most prosaic in all the ,world.

America has no great capital city' whose direct or indirect

I. America still has no capital city but already contains very large cities. In the year rS30, Philadelphia reckoned I6I,ooo inhabitants and New York 202,000. The ordinary people who dwell in these huge towns form a popu- lace even more dangerous than that of European towns. In the first lo stance they are made up of freed Blacks condemned by the law and public opinion to an hereditary state pf misery and degradation. In its midst you also meet

CAUSES _WHICH TP.ND TO MAINTAIN A DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC 325

influence is felt throughout the length and breadth of the land, a fact I regard as one of the foremost reasons why republican institutions are maintained in the United States. In towns men can hardly be prevented from assembling, getting overexcited together, and adopting sudden passionate resolutions. Towns virtually cohstiruie great assemblies with all the inhabitants as members. In them, the people wield astonishing influence over their magistrates and often carry their desires into execution without the latter's intervention.

Once the provinces are subject to the capital, the destiny of the whole empire is placed not only in the hands of a section of the nation, which is unfair, bur also into the hands of a nation acting unilaterally, which is most dangerous..''fhe supremacy .of capital cities represents a great threat to. the representative system. It submits modern republics to the same defects as those of ancient rimes which have all perished from their ignorance of this system of government.

It would be.simple for me to list a great number of other secondary reasons which have supported and confirmed the establishment and continuance of the democratic republic in the United States. But. in the midst of this host of favorable circumstances I observe two main. ones which I am anxious to point out.

a crowcl of Europeans forced by misfortune or misconduct to sail for the shores of the New World; these men bring to the United States our most serious vices and they possess nore of those interests which might counter- act that influence. Since they inhabit the country without being citizens of it, they are ready to turn all the passions which agitate the community to their own advantage. Thus, for some time we have seen serious riots break- ing out in Philadelphia and in New York. Such disturbances are unknown in the rest of the country which is not alarmed by them because the popu- lation in the cities has not exercised up until now any power or any influence over the inhabitants of the countryside.

Nevertheless, I look upon the size of certain American cities arld above all the nature of their inhabitants as a genuine danger threatening the future of the democratic republics of the New World and I do not hesitate to predict that.that will be the source of their downfall unless their government succeeds in creating an armed force which will remain under the control of the Illajority of the nation, 6ut Which will be independent of the town population and thus able to rep'ress its excesses.

PART 2 INFLUENCE OF DEMOCRACY

ON THE OPINIONS OF AMERICANS

CHAPTER I

WHY DEMOCRATIC NATIONS DISPLAY A MORE PASSIONATE AND

LASTING LOVE FOR EQUALITY THAN FOR FREEDOM

The first and liveliest of the passions insp\red by equality of status, I need not say, is the love of equality itself. No one will be surprised, therefore, if I speak of that before all others.

Everybody has noticed that in · our time, and above all in France, this passion fm equaliry has occupied a greater place in the human heart every day. It has been said a hundred times that our contemporaries felt a much warmer and more persistent affection for equality than for freedom; but I feel that no one has adequately analyzed the reasons for this fact. I shall try to do so.

It is possible to imagine an extreme point at which freedom and equality meet and blend together.

I am assuming that all citizens work together in government and that each one has an equal right to dp so.

Then, with no man different from his fellows, nobody will be able to wield tyrannical power; men will be completely free because they will be entirely equal; they "will all be completely equal because they will be entirely free. Democratic nations aim for this ideal.

That is the most complete form of equaliry on the earth; but there are a thousand others which lack as perfect a form but are no less cherished by such nations.

DEMOCRACY IN· AMERICA

Equality can take root in civil society without having any sway m the world of politics. A man may have the right to enjoy the same pleasures, enter the same professious,meet in the same places; in a word, to live in the same way and to seek wealth by the same means, without all men taking the same part in the government.

A sort of equality may even take root in the world of politics, although political freedom is lacking. it man is the equal of all but one of his fellow men and that one man is, without distinc- tion, the master of all and appoints his agents of power equally from all.

It would be easy to invent several other hypotheses in which a very considerable measure of equality might be united to more or less free institutions or even to institutions which are not at all free.

Although men may not become absolutely equal without being wholly free and as a result equality, in its mos·t extreme form, may be confounded with freedom, yet we are justified in distinguishing one from the other.

Men's taste for freedom and equality are, in effect, two differ- ent things and I am not afraid to add that in democratic nations they are also unequal.

Upon close inspection, it will be seen that in e;ery century one unusual and predpminapt fact appears to which all the others are.connected., This fact almost always produces a semi'. nal thought or an overriding passion which.in the end draws to itself all other feelings and ideas in its wake. It resembl~s 'the main river into which each of the surrounding streams seems to flow. -

Freedom has reve;iled itself to men at different times and beneath ·different forms; it has not been exclusively bound· to one social state and 'it makes its appearance elseV.:here than in democracies. Thus it cannot possibly be taken as the distinctive characteristic of democracies. ·· ·

The special and predominant fact which particularizes these centurie~ is the equality of social conditions; the main passion which stirs the men of such ages is the love of this equality.

Do not inquire what unusual attraction men of democratic

WHY DEMOCRATIC NATIONS DISPLAY PASSION FOR EQUALITY 585

ages possess toward living as equals nor the particular reasqns they may have for clinging so tenacipusly on to equality rather than the advantages society offers. Equality forms the distinctive characteristic of the era in which they live and that alone is enough to explain why they prefer it to all the rest.

But, apart from this reason, several others will usually incline men qf all ages to prefer equality to freedom.

)f a nation could.ever- succeed in destroying or simply dim- inishing the equality at its heart, it would n,anage it only .by long and laborious efforts, It would have to modify the state of society, abolish its laws, renew its ideas, change its cu~toms, and debase its ways. But destroying political freedom is easy, for just loosening one's grip is enough for it to slip away.

· Men, therefore, are attached to equality not simply J,ecause it is dear to them but also because they believe that it must last forever.

Ohe does not come across men so unintelligent or superficial that they qo not realize.that political freedom can, if carried to ex.cess, damage peace, property,.and the lives of individuals. On the contrary, only people of perception and foresight see the dangers witji which equality threatens us and usually they avoid pointing them out. They know that the troubli,s they fear are remote and they flatter themselves that only.future generation;; will be aff~cted; this scarcely wprries the present generation.- The evils broµght occasionally by f,~edom have an immediate effect; they are obvious to everyone and are more or less experi- enced by everyone. The evils produced by extreme equality become apparent only gradually; little.by little they creep into the heart of society; they are noticed every now and again so that, when they are at their most disturbing, habit has already nullified their effect.

The ·advantages of liberty become visible only in the long term and it is always easy to mistake the cause which brought them about.

The advantages of eq11ality are felt immediately and you can observe where they come from daily.

Political freedom from time to time grants exalted pleasures to a certain nll.mber of citizens.

586 DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA

Equality offers daily an abundance of modest pleasures to every single man. The charms of equality are felt the whole time and are within the reach of all; the noblest hearts appreciate them and the commonest souls delight in them. The passion engendered by equality must, therefore, be both vigorous and widespread.

Men cannot enjoy political freedom without some sacrifice and they only ever acquire it after much effort. But the pleasures of equality are freely on offer; each small incident in private life seems to provide such pleasures so that to be alive is all that is necessary for their enjoyment.

Democratic nations are at all times fond of equality but during certain ages their passion for it verges on excess. This occurs when the old social class structure, long since threatened, at last collapses after a final internal struggle and when the barriers dividing citizens are at length overturned. At such a moment, men pounce on equality as their spoils of war and cling on to it like a priceless possession which somebody is threatening to snatch away. The passion for equality sinks deeply into every corner of the human heart, expands, and fills it entirely. It is no use telling such men, as they blindly obey such an exclusive passion, that they are damaging their dearest interests; they are deaf. Do not bother to show them that freedom which is slipping through their fingers while their gaze is elsewhere; they are blind, or rather they can see only one advantage worth pursuing in the whole world.

The above applies to all democratic nations; the following concerns only the French.

Among the most modern nations, especially those of Europe, the taste for freedom and the conception cifit began to appear and develop only when social conditions were tend- ing toward equality and were a consequence of th_at very equality. Absolute monarchs worked hardest to level down ranks among their subjects. Among such nations equality pre- ceded liberty; equality was thus an established fact when liberty was still a novelty; the former had· already shaped opinions, customs, and laws of its own when the latter was emerging for the first time into the daylight. Thus this latter was still only a

INDIVIDUALISM IN DEMOCRATIC COUNTRIES

theoretical matter of opinion and taste, whereas the former had already crept into customs, had laid hold of social habits, ·and had given a particular coloring to the smallest of life's actions. Why is it surprising that our contemporaries prefer the first to the second?

I think that democratic nations have a natural taste for free- dom; left to themselves, they seek it out, become attached to it, and view any departure from it with distress. But they have a burning, insatiable, constant, and invincible passion for equality; they want equality in freedom and, if they cannot have it, they want it in slavery. They will endure poverty, subjection, barbarism but they will not endure aristocracy.

This is eternally true and especially in our time. Any man and any power which would contest the irresistible force of equality will be overturned and destroyed by it. Nowadays, freedom cannot take hold without it and despotism itself cannot reign without its support.

CHAPTER 2

INDIVIDUALISM IN DEMOCRATIC COUNTRIES

I have indicated how, in ages of equality, every man sought his beliefs within himself; I wish to show how, in these same periods, he directs all his feelings on to himself alone.

Individualism is a recently coined expression prompted by a new idea, for our forefathers knew only of egoism.

Egoism is an ardent and excessive love of oneself which leads man to relate everything back to himself and to prefer himself above everything.

Individualism is a calm and considered feeling which per- suades each citizen to cut himself off from his fellows and to withdraw into the circle of his'family and friends in such a way that he thus creates a small group of his own and willingly abandons society at large to its own devices. Egoism springs

588 DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA

from a blind instihct; individualism from wrong-headed thinking rather than from depraved feelings. It originates as much from defects of intelligence as from the mistakes of the heart. ,

Egoism blights the seeds of every virtue, individualism at first dries up only the source of public virtue. In the longer term it attacks and destroys all the others and will finally merge with egoism.

Egoism is a perversity as ·old as the world and is scarcely peculiar to one form of society more than•another.

Individualism is demoaratic in origin and threatens to grow as conditions. become equat.

Among aristocratic nations, families remain in the same situ- ation for centuries and often in the same location. This turns all the· genetations into contemporaries, as it were. A man practically always' knows his ancestors and has respect for them; he thinks he can already see his great-grandchildren and he loves them. He willingly assumes duties toward his ancestors and descendants, frequently sacrificing his personal pleasures for the sake of those beings who have gone before and who have yet to come.

In addition, aristocratic institutions achieve the effect of bind- -ing each man closely to several of his fellow citizens.

Since the class structure is distinct and static in an aristocratic nation, each class becomes a kind of homeland for the partici- pant because fr is more obvious and more cherished than the country at large. ·

All the citizens of aristocratic societies have fixed pos- itions one above another; consequently each man perceives a hove him someone whose protection is necessary to him and below him someoµe else whose cooperation he may claim.

Men living in aristocratic times are, therefore, almost always closely bound to an external obj~ct and they are often inclined to forget about themselves. It is true that in these same periods the general concept of human fellowship is ,dimly felt anp men seldom think of sacrificing themselves for mankind, whereas they often sacrifice themselves for certain other men.

:JNDIVIDUALISM IN DEMOCRATIC COUNTRIES

In democratic times, on the other hand, when the obligations _ of every person toward the race are much clearer, devotion to ' one man in particular becomes much rarer. The bond of human affection is wide and relaxed.

Among democratic nations, new families constantly emerge · from oblivion, while others fall away; all remaining families

shift with time. The thread of time is ever ruptured and the ._ track of generations is blotted out. Those who have gone De-

fore are easily forgotten and those who follow are still com- pletely unknown. Only those nearest to us are of any concern to us.

As each class closes up to the others and merges with them, its members become indifferent to each other and treat each other as strangers. Aristocracy had created a long chain of citizens from the. peasant to the ~g; democracy breaks down this chain and separates all the links.

As social equality spreads, a greater number of individuals are no longer rich or powerful enough to exercise great influence upon the fate of their fellows, but have acquired or have pre- served 'sufficient understanding and wealth to be able to satisfy their own needs. Such people owe nothing to anyone and, as it were, expect nothing from anyone. They are used to consid_ering themselves in isolation and quite willingly imagine their destiny as entirely in their own hands.

Thus, not only does democracy make men forget their ances- tors but also hides their descendants and keeps them apart from their fellows. It constantly brings them back to themselves and threatens in the end to imprison them in the .isolation of their own hearts.

•

PART4

HE INFLUENCE EXERCISED BY DEMOCRATIC IDEAS

AND OPINIONS ON

POLITICAL SOCIETY

I would not be fulfilling the object of this book if, after dem- onstrating the ideas and opinions prompted by equality, I did

, not, in conclusion, indicate the general influence these very , opinions and ideas may exert upon the government of human

societies. To achieve this, I shall be forced to go over old ground but I

hope that the reader will not refuse to follow 111e when well- known paths lead him toward some new truth.

<

CHAPTER I

EQUALITY NATURALLY GIVES MEN A "LIKING FOR FREE INSTITUTIONS

Equality, which makes men independent of each other, per- suades them to adopt the habit and liking for following their own persuasion when it comes to their private affairs. This complete independence, which they enjoy in relation to their equals and in their private lives, inclines them to view all auth- ority with a jaundiced eye and ·soon promotes the idea and love of political liberty. Men living in such times advance, therefore, upon an incline which naturally leads them toward free insti- tutions. Choose any man among them at random and delve

DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA

down, if possible, to his basic instincts; you will discover that, of all the different forms of government, the one he first enter- tains and values the most is that whose leader he has elected and whose actions he controls.

Love of independence is the first and most striking feature of all the political effects caused by equality of social conditions and the one which frightens timid spirits most. Nor can it be said that they are completely mistaken in such ·a fear because anarchy does hav.e a more fearful appear<\Ilce in democratic countries than elsewhere. As soon as citizens cease to influence each other and the national authority holding them in their place begins to falter, it would seem that disorder must instantly reach its climax and that, as each citizen moves aside, the fabric of society must immediately crumble away.

However, I remain convinced that anarchy is not the greatest disaster which democratic ages should fear but the least.

In fact, equality prompts two tendencies: one leads men directly to independence and could suddenly push them as far as anarchy; the other directs men by a longer, more covert but surer route toward slavery.

Nations easily see the·former and stand against it;·they drift along with the latter without seeing it; it is particularly import- ant to make them aware of it.

For my part, far from blaming equality for the intractability it inspires, I am praising it mainly for that very reason. I admire the way it deposits in the depths of the mind and heart of every man this secret concept and instinctive inclination toward political independence, which consequently prepares the remedy for the ill it has produced. I am attached to equality because of this very aspect.

IDEAS DEMOCRATIC NATIONS HAVE ON GOVERNMENT ·777

CHAPTER Z.

THE IDEAS DE.M.OCRATIC NATIONS HAVE ON GOVERNMENT NATURALLY

FAVOR THE CONCENTRATION OF POLITICAL POWERS

' Tlie idea of intermediary powers bet'¥een sovereign and subjects was natur;l to the imagination of aristocratic peoples because

- these powers belonged to individuals or families whose birth, . education or wealth singleq them otit or who seemed destmed · to comma~d. This same idea is naturally absent from the minds

of men in times of equality for opposite reasons; it cannot be introduced, except artificia1ly, nor retained except wi~h c~n- siderable effort, whereas the thought of a smgle central authonty which governs all citizens directly occurs, so to speak, effort- lessly in men's consciousness. . . .

Moreover, in politics as i~ philosophy or rehg10n, democratic nations welcome with'pleasure simple and general id~as. Com- plex systems put them off and they like to picture a great nat10n. whose citizens resemble one set type and are controlled by a single authority. . .

Following the idea of a single, central authonty, the one.th~t occurs rhost spontaneously to.men's minds in times of equality 1s that of a uniform legislation. Since each man sees 1ittle difference between him and his neighbor, he has difficulty in understanding why a rule applying to one person should not equally apply to all the others. Privileges of the smallest kind are, therefore, repellent to him. The slightest differences in_the politi~al ins_ti- tutions of the same nation pain him and leg1slat1ve umform1ty seems the foremost condition of a good government.

On the other hand, this same idea 9f a uniform rule, equally imposed on every member of society, is virtually foreign to the human mind in aristocratic ages. Either it did not occur to them, or they rejected it.

These opposed ment;il tendencies end up, in one way or another, by becoming blind instincts or insuperable habits to

778 DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA

such a degree that they continue to direct men's behavior despite a few individual cases. Occasionally, for all the variety of medi- eval life, you come across a few individuals who are entirely alike but that did not prevent the legislator from assigning different duties and rights to each of them. And, by contrast, present governments wear themselves out imposing the same customs and laws on populations which haye as yet nothing in common.

As a nation's social conditions grow more equal, individuals seem smaller and society bigger or rather, each citizen, having grown like the rest, melts into the crowd and only a vast and imposing image of the whole nation now stands before the observer.

This naturally gives men of democratic times a very elevated opinion of society's privileges- and a very low opinion of an individual's rights. They readily ackno_wledge that the interest of the former is all-important, whereas that of the latter is not so at all. They are quite willing to grant that the authority representing society is endowed with more enlightenment and wisdom than any of the men composing it and that its duty and its right are to guide each citizen by the hand.

If we look closely at our contemporaries and seek out the very roots of their pc:>litical opinions, we shall find a few of the ideas I have just traced out and, perhaps, we shall be surnrised that so much agreement exists among people so often at war.

Americans believe that the social authority of any state should emanate directly from the people but that, ·once this authority has been established, they hardly conceive any limits for it; they freely recognize that it has the right to do everything.

As for special privileges granted to towns, families, or indi- viduals, this idea has entirely disappeared. It has never entered their heads that the same law cannot be applied uniformly to all parts of one state and all the men living in it.

These same opinions are increasingly spreading throughout Europe; they are making their way into those very nations which have the most violent objections to the doctrine of the sovereignty of the people and which disagree with the Americans about the origins of power but see power in the same light. In

IDEAS DEMOCRATIC NATIONS HAVE ON GOVERNMENT 779

all these nations the concept of an intermediary authority is obscured and blotted out. The idea of a right belonging to certain individuals is rapidly disappearing from men's minds to be replaced by the all-powerful and, so to speak, unique right of society itself. These ideas take root and grow as social conditions become more equal and men more alike; equality engenders such ideas and they, in their turn, hasten the progress of equality. (See Appendix A, p. 858.)

In France, where the revolution to which I refer is more advanced than in any other European country, these very opinions have completely seized hold of men's minds. Listening carefully to the voice of the different parties in France, it will be obvious that everyone is adopting them. Most consider that the government is acting badly but everyone thinks that the government should keep acting and interfering in everything. Those same people who wage the most fearsome wars neverthe- less agree on this point. The unity, the universality, the omnipo- tence of society's power, and the uniformity of its rules represent the outstanding feature of all the political systems invented in our day. They recur at the heart of the strangest utopias. The human mind still pursues these images even in its dreams.

If such ideas arise spontaneously in the minds of individuals, they strike the imaginations of princes even more readily.

While the old state of European society undergoes these changes and collapses, sovereigns invent new beliefs in relation to their competence and duties; they are realizing for the first time that the central government which they represent caf! and should, solely and in a uniform manner, administer all state business and all citizens. Such an opinion, which I hazard to say no European monarch had ever thought of before our time, reaches the deepest realms of these princes' minds and it stands firm amid the disturbance of all other thoughts.

Our contemporaries are, therefore, much less divided than is supposed; they quarrel endlessly about who should administer sovereign power but find it easy to agree over its duties and rights. Everyone portrays government as a unique, simple, caring, and creative force.

All subsidiary political ideas are unstable but that one remains

__j

DEMOCRACY IN "AMERICA

fixed, unchangeable, and consistent. Publicists and politicians adopt it; the crowd greedily snatches it up; those governed and those governing agree to pursue it with equal enthusiasm: it is

. the primary idea.to be adopted and appears to be innate. It is not, therefore, the result of some whim of men's minds

but the 11atural condition of men's present- state.

CHAPTER 3

THE OPINIONS OF DEMOCRATIC NATIONS ARE IN ACCORD WITH

THEIR IDEAS, LEADING THEM TO CENTRALIZE POLITICAL POWER

If men, in times of equality, readily entertain the idea of a great central power, it is quite certain that their h_abits and opinions incline them to acknowledge such a power and to foster its pro&'ess. A few words are sufficient to make this point clear since I have already outlined most of the reasons for it elsewhere.

Men 'Jiving in democracies, having neither s_uperiors nor inferiors, ndr habitual and indisp~nsable partners, readily fall bac1> upon themselves and think of themselves as individuals. I had the chance of illustrating that at some length.when dealing with individualism.

It is, therefore, only with some effort t.hat these men wrench themselves from their private business to turn their attention to communal affairs; their natural inclination is to leave respons- ibility for them to the single, public, and permanent representa- tive which is the state.

Not only do they have no natural liking for public business but often they lack the time for it. In 4emocra* times, private life is so active, so frantic, so full of desires atid work that each man has almost no energy or leisure left for political life.

I am certainly not the one to say that such inclinations are invincible since my main aim in writing this book has b~en to challenge them. It is simply that I am asserting that, in these

CENTRALIZATION OF GOVERNMENT

times, a hidden power is constantly at work developing them in the human heart and. that, by leaving them unhindered, they will come to fill it entirely .

Equally, I have had the chance to show how the growing love of prosperity and the shifting n·ature of property lead democratic nations to dread all material upheavals. The love of public peace is often the only political passion these nations retain and it becomes more active and powerful with them as all the others wither and die out. This naturally inclines citizens· to grant or surrender endless new rights to central government, which alone appears to them, in the exercise of its own defense, to be pos- sessed of both the interest and the means to defend them from anarchy.

Since in times of equality no one is obliged to lend his assist- ance to his fellow men and no one has the right to expect any great support from them, each man is both independent and weak. These two conditions which one must not view either separately or connected together give the citizen of democracies very contradictory urges. Independence fills him with confidence and pride amongst his equals while his vulnerability occasion- ally makes him feel the need for outside support, which he cannot expect from one of his own people since they are all powerless and unsympathetic. In such extreme circumstances he naturally turns his gaze toward this huge authority rising above the general impotence. His needs and, above all, his desires constantly bring him back to that authority which he ends up by regarding as the sole and necessary support for his weakness as an individual. 1

r. In democratic societies, it is only the central power which has any stability in its position and any permanence in its undertakings. AU the citizens are in a state of ceaseless movement and change. Thus, it is in the nature of every government to seek constantly to enlarge its sphere of influence. It is, therefore, impossible for this not to be successful in the long run, since it acts with a fixed design in mind and a constant will imposed upon men whose position, ideas, and desires change from day to day.

It often happens that citizens work for the central power without meaning to.

Democratic periods are times of experiment, innovatk>n, and adventure. There is always a host of men who ate engaged upon some difficult ot

DRMOeRACY IN AMERICA

That may ~ore completely explain what often happens in democracies in which men, who feel so uncomfonable submit- ting to superiors, patiently tolerate one master, proving them- selves both proud and servile.

The loathing men feel for privilege increases as these privileges become rarer and less ·important, so that democratic passions would seem to burn the brighter in those very times when they have the least fuel. I have already accounted for this phenom- enon, No inequality, however great, strikes the eye irr a tiine of general social inequality, whereas the slightest disparity appears shocking amid universal uniformity; the more complete this uniformity, the more intolerable it looks. Thei::efore, it is natural that love of equality should thrive constantly with equality itself: to foster it is to see it grow.

This ever-burning and endless loathing which democratic nations feel for the slightest prfvilege has an unusual effect upon the gradual concentration of every political right in the hands of a single representative of the state. Since the sovereign authority stands necessarily and indubitably above all the citizens, it does not arouse their envy and each citizen thinks tj,at he is depriving all his fello~.men of those powers that he grants to the crown.

The man living in.democratic ages is ~!ways extremely reluct- ant to obey his neighbor who is his equal; he refuses to acknow- ledge that the latter has any ~bility superior to his own; he distrusts his fa.rm of justice and'Iooks enviously upon his power;

new enterprise that they pursue by themselves without disturbing their peers. These people are the first to admit that, as a general principle, the public authority should not interfere in private affairs; but, as an exception to that, each one of them wants its assistance with the particular affair which concerns him and seeks to attract the government to act on his behalf, ·all the time seeking 1:o restrict it in every other sphere.

With a whole host of people taking this particular view on a range of different issues at one and the same time, the sphere of the central power extends imperceptibly in all directions although everyone wants to restrain it. A de~ocratic government, therefore, increases its powers simply because of its permanence. Time is on its side; it profits from every chahce event; individual passions unconsciously help it along and it could be said that the older a democratic society is the more centralized its goveinment becomes. ·

CENTRALIZATION OF GOVERNMENT

he both fears and despises him; he likes to bring home to him the whole time that they are both equally dependent upon the same master.

Any central power which pursues these natural feelings loves and promotes equality, for equality eases, extends, and guaran- tees the actions of such a power.to an unusual degree.

Equally it can be said that all central governments worship equality because that saves them the trouble of inquiring into the end\e§s details they ougjit to consider if they had to adapt rules to indivlduals inste~d of subjecting them all indiscrimin- ately to the same rules. So the government likes what the citizens like and naturally hates what they hate. This shared feeling which, itl demcicratic nations, constantly unites each individual and the sovereign power in a common thought, establishes between them a hiddeq and permanent bond' of sympathy. The goverfment's faults are f~rg;iven for the sake of its inclinations, the public is reluctant to withdraw its trust, whatever excesses or errors occur, and restores this trust whenever it is called upon to do so. Democratic nations often hate those in whose hands central power is placed but they always retain their affection for the ppwer itself.

Thps) have reached the same goal along two contrasting paths. I have demonstrated that equality directs men to think of a single, µniform, and strong government. I .. have just shown that it gives men a taste for it, so that present-day nations lean toward this type of government, directed by the natural inclination of hean and mind. All they have to do to reach such a goal is not to hold back.

I thi_nk that, in the den10cratic times opening before us, indi- vidual independence and local freedoms will always be anifi- cially contrived whereas centralization will be the natural form of government. (See Appendix B, p. 858.)

.I

802 DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA

powers. That led them to make revolutions and inspired in a great number of them this barbaric love of disorder and independence which all revolutions, whatever their aim, always engender.

I do not think that there is. a single European country where the prog_ress of equality has not been preceded or fol- lowed by some violent\Changes in the status of property, and of persons, and almost all these changes have been accompanied by much anarchy and license because they were brought about by the least civilized section of the nation against the most civilized.

. That resulted in two opposed tendencies which I have pre- v10usly portrayed. As long as the democratic revolution was at its height, the men involved in destroying the old aristocratic powers which opp_osed it displayed a strong spirit of independ- ence; but, as the tnumph of equality moved td completion, they gradually gave way to those feelings natural to that condition of ~quality and they strengthened and centralized the power of society. They had wished to be free in order to become equal but, as equality took greater hold with the help- of this freedom, It put freedom further from their grasp.

These two conditions have not always followed each other. ?ur ancestors have ·manifested how a nation was able to organ- ize a vast mternal tyranny at the very time that it was escaping from the authonty of the nobility and was confronting the power of every king, thus teaching the world how to win independence and to lose it at the same time.

Nowadays, men can see that the old powers are crumbling all around th~m; they observe.all the old influences dying away and all the ancient bamers fallmg down; this disturbs the judgment of even_ the wise_st men who pay attention only to the amazing revolut10n seethmg before their eyes and believe that the human race i~ about to collapse forever into anarchy. Were they to conceive the final consequences of this revolution they would perhaps entertain quite different fears. '

~or my part, I own that I do not trust this spirit of freedom which seem_s to fire ':'Y contemporaries; I see plainly enough that the nations of this age are in a turbulent state but it is not

DESPOTISM DEMOCRATIC NATIONS HAVE TO FEAR

so clear to me that they have a liberal attitude. And I am afraid that at the end of these agitated times, sovereigns may be more powerful than ever before.

CHAPTER 6

WHAT SORT OF DESPOTISM DEMOCRATIC NATIONS HAVE TO FEAR

I had noted in my stay in the United' States that a democratic state of society similar to the American model could lay itself open to the establishment of despotism with unusual ease, and I had seen on my return to Europe to what extent most of its rulers had already exp)oited the ideas, opinions, and needs enge,ndered by such a state of society to enlarge the range of their power.

That led me to think that the nations of Christendom would perhaps end up by suffering some similar oppression to the one which once burdened several of the peoples of the ancient world.

A study of the subject in more detail and five years of further meditation have not lessened my fears but they have redirected them. '

Centuries past never witnessed any ruler so absolute or power- ful as to undertake the administration, on his own and without the support of secondary powers, of every part of a great empire; nor did anyone try to subject all his people indiscriminately to the details of a unif?rm code of conduct; nor did anyone descend to the level of every common citizen in order to rule and direct him. The idea of such an enterprise never occurred to the mind of man and, had it done so, the lack of education, the defects of administrative machinery, and, above all, the natural obstacles aroused by the inequality of social conditions would soon have stopped his attempts at so grandiose a design.

Wlien the Roman emperors were at the height of their powers, the various nations inhabiting the Roman world still presewed their different customs and manners: although they obeyed

I,

DEMO<:;RAC~. IN AMERICA

the. same monarch, most of the provinces were administered separately: they abounded in powerful and energetic town-

. ships and, although the whole government of the empire was concentrated in the emperor's hands and he remained the arbiter pf everything when the need arose, the small details of social life and private everyday existence normally eluded his control.

The emperors, it is Frue, wielded immens~ and unchecked power }Vhich allowed them to ind11llle freely any strange whims they might have and to use the entire power of the state to satisfy them; they often 'abused this power to deprive a citizen arbitrarily of his property or his life: their tyranny was an excessive burden on a few people but never spread over a great number; it latched on to a·· few main objects, leaving the rest alone; it was violent but its extent. was limited.

If despotism were to be established in present-day demo- cracies, it would probably assume a different character; it would be more widespread and kinder; it would debase men without tormenting them.

Doubtless in ·an age of enlightenment and equality such as our own, rulers could more easily manage to gather all public powers ~to their own hands and to intrude fn,rther and more regularly info the realm of private interests than was ever poss- ible for any ancient sovereign. But this same equality which fosters despotism also tempers it. We have seen how public customs be~ome more humane and gentler· as men grow more alike and equal; wlien no single citizen has great power or wealth, tyranny is to some extent deprived of opportunity and field o£action. Since all fortunes are modest, passions are natur- ally limited, imagination restricted, and pleasures simple. This universal moderation controls the ruler's excesses and con- strains the disorderly surge of his desires within certain limits.

Aside from these reasons borrowed from the nature of the state of society itself, I could add many others which f would be taking from areas beyond the range of my subject but I inte°'d to stay within the boundaries I have set myself.

Democratic governments might become violent and cruel at certain times of great excitement and danger but these

DESPOTISM DEMOCRATIC NATIONS HAVE TO FEAR 805

crises will not happen often or last long. (See Appendix C, p. 859.)

When I consider the trivial nature of men's passions, the mildness of their manners, the extent of their education, the purity of their religion, the gentleness of their morality, their industrious and tidy habits, the restraint they almost all display in their vices as in their virtues, I have no fear that their leaders will be considered as tyrants but rather as guardians.

Thus, I think that the type of oppression threatening democ- racies will not be like anything there has been in the world before; our contemporaries would not be able to find any example of it in their memories. I, too, am having difficulty finding a word which will exactly convey the whole idea I have formed; the old words despotism and tyranny are not suitable. This is a new phenomenon which I must, therefore, attempt to define since I can find no name for it.

I wish to imagine under what new features despotism might appear in the world: I see an innumerable crowd of men, all alike and equal, turned in upon themselves in a restless search for those petty, vulgar pleasures with which they fill their souls. Each of them, living apart, is almost unaware of the destiny of all the rest. His children and personal friends are for him the whole of the human race; as for the remainder of his fellow citizens, he stands alongside them but does not see them; he touches them without feeling them; he exists only in himself and for himself; if he still retains his family circle, at any rate he may be said to have lost his country.

Above these men stands an immense and protective power which alone is responsible for looking after their enjoyments and watching over their destiny. It is absolute, meticulous, ordered, provident, and kindly disposed. It would be like a fatherly authority, if, fatherlike, its aim were to prepare men for manhood, but it seeks only to keep them in perpetual childhood; it prefers its citizens to enjoy themselves provided they have only enjoyment in mind. It works readily for their happiness but it wishes to be the only provider and judge of it. It provides their security, anticipates and guarantees their needs, supplies their pleasures, directs their principal concerns, manages their

1} I

i 806 DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA

industry, regulates their estates, divides their inheritances. Why can it not_ remove from them entirely the bother of thinking a"nd the troubles of life?

Thus, it reduces daily the value and frequency of the exercise of free choice; it restricts the activity of free will within a nar- rower range and gradually removes autonomy. itself from each citizen. Equality has prepared men for all this, inclining them to tolerate all these things and often even to see. them as a blessing.

Thus, the ruling power, having taken each citizen one by one into its powerful grasp and having molded him to its own liking, spreads its arms over the whole of society, covering the surface of social life with a network of petty, complicated, detailed, and · uniform rules through which even the most original minds and the most energetic of spirits c·annot reach the light in order to rise above the crowd . .It does not break men's. wills but it does soften, bend, and control them; rarely does it force men to act but it constantly opposes what actions they perform; it does not destroy the start of anything but it stands in its way; it does not tyrannize but it inhibits, represses, drains, snuffs out, dulls s·o much effort that finally it reduces each nation to nothing more than a flock of timid and hardworking animals with the govern- ment as shepherd.

I have always believed that this type of organized, gentle, and peaceful enslavement just described could link up more easily than imagined with some of the external forms of freedom and that it would not be impossible for it to take hold in the very shadow of the sovereignty of the people.

Our contemporaries are ceaselessly agitated by two conflict- ing passions: they feel the need to be directed as well· as the desire to remain free. Since they are unable to· blot out either of these hostile feelings, they strive to satisfy both of them together. They conceive a single, protective, and all-powerful government but one elected by the citizens. They combine centralization with the sovereignty of the people. That gives them some respite. They derive consolation from being supervised by thinking that they have chosen their supervisors. Every individual tolerates being tied down because he sees that it is not another man nor a class of people holding the end of the chain but society itself.

DESPOTISM DEMOCRATIC NATIONS HAVE TO FEAR

Under this system citizens leave their state of dependence just long enough to choose their masters and then they. return to it.

At the present time, many people very ea~ily fall in with this type of compromise between a despotic administration and the sovereignty of the people and they think they have sufficiently safeguarded individual freedom when they surrendered it to a national authority:That is n9t good enough for me. The charac- ter.of the master is much less important to me than the fact of obedience.

However, I shall not say that such·a constitution is not infin- itely· preferable to one which brings all powers together and then places them ~n the hands of one man or one irresponsible body of men. Of all the various forms of democratic despotism, that would be the worst.

When the ruling power is elected or closely supervised by .a genuinely elected and independent legislature, the oppression it imposes on individuals is sometimes greater but is always less degrading because each citizen, faced with these restrictions and his own impotence,,can still imagine that his obedience is only to himself and that he is sacrificing to one of. his desires all his others.

Equally, I realize that; when the ruling power represents and is dependent upon the nation, the powers and rights taken from each citizen do not simply serve the head of state but the state itself and that private individuals derive some advantage from the sacrifice of their independence to the public good.

Creating a national representative system in a very centralized country is thus to lessen the damage extreme centralization can produce but it does not entirely destroy it.

I see quite dearly that, in this way, individual intervention in the most important affairs is preserved but it is just as much suppressed in small and private ·ones. We forget that it is, above all, in the details that we run the risk of enslaving men. For my part, I would be tempted to believe that freedom in the big things of life is le'ss important than in the slightest, if I thought that we could always be guaranteed the.latter when we did not possess the former.

808 DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA

Subjection in the minor things of life is obvious every day and is experienced indiscriminately by all citizens. It does not cause them to lose hope but it constantly irks them until they give up the exercise of their will. It gradually blots out their mind and enfeebles their spirit, whereas obedience demanded only in a small number c;,f very serious circumstances involves enslave- ment on rare occasions and then burdens only a certain number of people. It will be useless to call upon those very citizens, who have become so dependent·upon central government, to choose from time to time the representative of this government· this very important but brief and rare exercise of their free choice will not prevent their gradual loss of the faculty of autonomous thought, feeling, and action so that they will slowly fall below the level of hum.anity.

I may add that they will soon lose the capacity to exercise the great and only privilege open to them. The democratic nations which introduced freedom into politics at- the same time that they were increasing despotism in the administrative sphere have been led into the strangest paradoxes. Faced with the need to manage small affairs where common sense can be enough, they reckon citizens are incompetent; when it comes to gov- ermng the whole state, they give these citizens immense preroga- tives. They turn them by degrees into playthings of the ruler or his masters, higher than kings or lower than men. Having e~auste? all the various electoral systems without finding one which smted them, they look surprised and continue to search as if the defects they see had far more to do with the country'; constitution than with that of the electorate.

·It is, indeed, difficult to imagine ho~ men who have com- pletely given up the habit of self-government could successfully choose those who should do it for them,. and no one will be convinced that a liberal, energetic, and prudent government can ever emerge from the voting of a nation of servants.

A constitution, republican in its head and ultra-monarchist in all its other parts, has always struck me as a short-lived monstrosity. The vices of those who govern and the inepti- tude of those governed would soon bring it to ruin and the people, tired of its representatives and of itself, would create

CONTINUATION OF THE PRECEDING CHAPTERS

freer institutions or would soon revert to its abasement to one single master. (See Appendix D, p. 8 59.)

CHAPTER 7

CONTINUATION OF THE PRECEDING CHAPTERS

I believe it to be easier to establish an absolute and despotic government among a people whose social conditions are equal than in any other and I think that such a government, once established in such a nation, would not only oppress men but would, in the end, strip each man there of several of the principal attributes of his humanity.

Despotism, therefore, strikes me as particularly threatening in democratic ages.

I think that at all times I should have loved freedom, but in the times in which we live I feel inclined to worship it.

On the other hand, I am convinced that all those who will be alive in the coming cerlturies and might try to base their auth- _o~ity on privilege and aristocracy will fail. All those.who might w1Sh to attract and retain authority within one single class will also fail. At the present time there is no ruler so skillful or so strong that he could establish despotism by restoring permanent distinctions of rank between his subjects; nor is there a legislator so wise·or so powerful that he is capable of maintaining free institutions without adopting equality as his first principle and emblem. Thus, all those who now wish to found or guarantee the independence and dignity of their fellows should show them- ~elves friends of equality, and the !mly worthy means of appear- mg such is to be so: upon this depends the success of their sacred enterprise.

Hence it is not a matter of reconstructing an aristocratic society but of drawing freedom from within the democracy in which God has placed us.

Both these basic truths appear simple, clear, and fertile to me