Alexis de Tocqueville and James Madison

Alexis de Tocqueville's visit to the United States in the early part of the nineteenth century prompted his work Democracy in America, in which he expressed the ability to make democracy work. Throughout his travels Tocqueville noted that private interest and personal gain motivated the actions of most Americans, which in turn cultivated a strong sense of individualism. Tocqueville believed that this individualism would soon "sap the virtue of public life" (395) and create a despotism of selfishness. This growth of despotism would be created by citizens becoming too individualistic, and therefore not bothering to fulfill their civic duties or exercise their freedom. Tocqueville feared that the political order of America would soon become

Democracy in America has been a guiding principle since the foundation of the country. Many over the years have commented on the structure and formation of democracy but more importantly the implementation and daily function within the democratic parameters that have been set. Alexis de Tocqueville was a French political thinker and historian born July 29, 1805. He is most famously known for his work Democracy in America. Democracy in America has been an evolving social and economic reform, and has continually changed since it’s founding.

On the matter of The Tyranny of the Majority I find many of your arguments to be just and observant of the laws that will be cemented in place by the Constitution. The questions you present are questions that many, such as myself and Hamilton, have even wondered. “How can one protect from tyranny” comes from a long line of tortuous governments of the past that have left the people scarred and wary of the new and of the future of governmental practices. You’ve asked that “If the majority rules the government, then who is there to rule them?” The fear that a faction could over take this majority and rule the country for years without an ability to stop or counteract its actions has passed through many minds alike my own and of those akin to yours.

James Madison proposed the Madison Model in "which the powers of the government are separated into three branches: executive, legislative, and judicial". [1] This meant that the constitution separates governmental powers and neither branch would be able to dominate one another. In order to govern the branches would have to work together. The Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branch has power over the other to prevent one to become too powerful. This creates the system of checks and balances.

In Democracy in America, French sociologist, Alexis de Tocqueville perceived America as a “land of wonders” where

“I hold it to be impious and detestable maxim, that, politically speaking, the people have a right to do anything; and yet I have asserted that all authority originates in the will of the majority. Am I, then, in contradiction with myself? Alexis de Tocqueville was a French political thinker and writer. Alexis began his research for Democracy in America after being sent to the United States from France to learn about the new countries prison system. He arrived in the United States in 1831, it was the age of Andrew Jackson, Indian relocation, westward expansion, and high tension between the North and South over slavery, which would eventually lead to the Civil war. While Tocqueville was in the United States it was a crucial time in world history, because many governments in the western we're shifting from the aristocratic order of the world to a more democratic order in the new.

Democracy in America, De Toqueville thinks it is represented as a tyranny of the majority. The government is ruled by the majority and once a law is passed following the will of the majority. The opposing view of the minority is immediately silenced and repressed. He brings a question to point. A king can do as he pleases for himself at his own will what is stopping the majority that truly rules the government from doing this as well? There is nothing as long as the sovereignty of the nation lies in the hands of the majority. He warns that this form of despotism will bring the downfall of America. Absolute power possessed by the mob will eventually drive the repressed minority to physical action that will launch America into Anarchy. This is

The philosophies of Madison can be arguably split up into two different segments. First, Madison is portrayed as a founding father who ties strong commitments to the individual’s liberty and property rights and how they are fundamental to his idea of republican government. The opposite view of Madison’s philosophy is that he is a fundamental believer to the principle of majority rule as the basis of republican government. As mentioned above, this essay will focus on two authors, Richard Matthews and Gregory Weiner, as they provide detailed opinions for both views of Madisonian philosophy. Before determining the best route in understanding Madison’s political ideology, it is important to point out the viewpoints of the two authors. Richard Matthews argues that Madison is a “constant liberal prince” who’s committed to the individual liberty and property rights; whereas Gregory Weiner argues the latter, that Madison stands firmly in the thought that the principles of majority rule is the foundation of his version of republican government. Although these two authors disagree on the majority of principles Madison spoke on, they stand united on one Madisonian idea, the idea that Madison wanted reason to always triumph passion.

"Democracy in America" was Alexis De Tocqueville's observation of American political character. His 1830s view on the laws are different now in the 21st century. De Tocqueville adds his view of property,power, and religion. He states that in 1830 "the democracy which governs American communities appears to be rapidly rising into power in Europe" thus became the idea behind Democracy in America. I figuratively sat down with Alexis De Tocqueville to talk about his views in Democracy in America and told him how different or similar some are to our democracy now.

Tocqueville expresses the fear of a tyranny of the majority in a democracy. Tocqueville describes the idea of a majority by stating, “it is the very essence of democratic government that the majority has absolute sway, for in a democracy nothing resists the majority,” (Vol. 1, PT 2, Chapter 7

When the French aristocrat Alexis de Tocqueville sets foot in the New World in May 1831, he believes he already knows what he will find. Searching for solid political structures after having been shaken by revolutions, he is convinced that the future of Europe lies in democratic America. On his nine-month journey, Tocqueville seeks to confirm his intuition that the entire Christian world is heading into the political modern age. America no longer is playing the role of the straggler who tries to imitate European development. In fact, the United States and its natural democracy have- almost unnoticing- surpassed the Old World and emerged as a model for it. This is exactly what Democracy in America wants to teach its European audience, as it

Democracy in America, De Tocqueville thinks America has a tyranny of the majority. The United States government ruled by a majority can pass a law to follow their own will but, opposing views of a minority become immediately silenced and oppressed. One important question brought to point in Democracy in America states, kings or dictators can do as they please at their own will but, what is stopping the majority that truly rules the government in America from doing this as well? There is nothing, provided the sovereignty of the nation lies in the hands of the majority. In addition to this a tyrannical public overwhelms the opinions of the minorities. Nevertheless, these notions of the minority will become subjugated at the fear of becoming shunned

While traveling across the United States, Alexis de Tocqueville recorded how democracy operates and the roles of its participants in, “Democracy in America.” Tocqueville demonstrates his admiration of the American democratic system and Americans’ dedication to freedom, equality, and supporting one another. Despite these praises, there is also a looming danger against liberty in not only America, but in all societies based on equality. The most imminent threat to liberty in these societies is despotism as it prevents individuals from exercising their natural freedoms and rights. Tocqueville proposes resolutions to this threat, such as, government decentralization and civil associations.

Democracy in America, De Tocqueville thinks America has a tyranny of the majority. The United States government ruled by a majority can pass a law to follow their own will but, opposing views of a minority become immediately silenced and oppressed. One important question brought to point in Democracy in America states, kings or dictators can do as they please at their own will but, what is stopping the majority that truly rules the government in America from doing this as well? There is nothing, provided the sovereignty of the nation lies in the hands of the majority. In addition to this a tyrannical public overwhelms the opinions of the minorities. Nevertheless, these notions of the minority will become subjugated at the fear of becoming shunned

In his book Democracy in America where he observed the qualities and traits of representative democracy, de Tocqueville noted that the governing system in America, where individuals form a state elect members to represent them in order to decide the laws of society, worked well but identified that there is an inherent injustice placed upon the minority who do not win elections, because they have no recourse to gain representation in deciding the laws that govern them and end up getting dominated by the majority, de Tocqueville called this the ‘tyranny of the majority’. de Tocqueville warned of the dangers of popular sovereignty (tyranny of the majority, and individuals losing their freedoms) but stated that it was good in the end in the case of the United States because it allowed a group of people to band together to become a society and become a legitimate player in world affairs and to defend themselves from European powers who wanted control of