The Consideration of Democracy, Blacks, and Slavery Tocqueville, in Democracy in America, dwells on the strengths and weaknesses of American democracy. When discussing race relations, he recognizes that the presence of the black race in America and the occupation of blacks in slavery could threaten the continuation of the United States as a Union and a republic. As a Union, the United States could be torn apart by the disparities between the North and the South and tensions between blacks and whites. As a republic, although the United States is more grounded, the aftermath of slavery could erode republican institutions if mores and laws are dangerously altered. Although Tocqueville leaves suggestions of action for the United States, he …show more content…
355). Being foreign to one another, having a previous relationship of master to slave, and being of different races would all contribute to the incapability and/or unwillingness of whites and blacks to intermingle, and thus unity would be impossible. In fact, Tocqueville believes that unity may never be possible and the Union may continue with weakness, first, because “a natural prejudice leads a man to scorn anybody who has been his inferior, long after he has become his equal,” and second, because “the abolition of slavery in the South would increased the repugnance felt by the white population toward the Negroes” (pp. 341, 357). Both reasons seem long-lasting, possibly permanent, in which whites would maintain a mindset and perspective concerning blacks, stemming from an inequality and inferiority that urged whites to use slavery. Whites, in the North and the South, view blacks with disdain initially because they believe blacks to be lesser beings and continually because they were once slaves and subordinates.
Certain circumstances in America have produced a solid and natural republic, but drastic alterations of mores and laws during and after slavery could rupture the republic. Tocqueville defines a republic as “an orderly state really founded on the enlightened will of the people...a conciliatory government under which resolutions have time to ripen, being discussed with deliberation and executed only when mature…[and under] the tranquil rule of the
A major problem that both James Madison, in Federalist papers 10 and 51, and Alexis de Tocqueville, in Democracy in America, discuss is that the majority would gain too much power within the democratic self-government, and as a result the United States would be overrun with tyranny. James Madison addresses his solutions for making sure that the government will be able to control the power of the majority, posed by factions. He believes that the United States needs to a strong central government in a large republic in order to control the power of the factions. Chapters of Alexis de Tocqueville support Madison’s thinking by discussing certain ideals that Madison touched on, and elaborating on them more to provide more evidence for Madison’s
Let us start with the introduction of this book: “Freedom, Slavery, and the Legacy of the American Revolution”, in which Levine wrote, “It altered the internal structure of American society more profoundly than having the Revolution”. (p. 3) Levine continues
The United States prides itself on being a land of freedom and opportunity. Individuals travel to the United States in hopes to utilize every advantage that life in America will bring. In Democracy in America, Alexis De Tocqueville divulges into his interpretations of the inner workings of the United States and what truly makes it so unique from its European counterparts.
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
Beginning in 1861, the civil war was fought over many political questions regarding slavery, yet was barely focused on the actual freedom of the slaves themselves. It is often taught that the Union fought for the freedom of slaves at the beginning of the war. However, it is more accurate to say that Abraham Lincoln’s primary goal at the beginning of the war was to reunite the Union after the majority of the slave-owning states seceded to protect their way of life: slavery. Yet, by the end of the war, the Union’s goal was to free the slaves. Though the laws securing slaves freedom and suffrage were contributed to by many, the primary driving forces behind them was the African Americans. Through their willingness to fight and support the Union cause, African Americans made the United States acknowledge their struggles and transformed the war into a fight for reconnection and freedom. Though hindered by racist people and policies, the African Americans’ participation during the war and Reconstruction greatly contributed to tremendous cultural change as well as the securing of legal rights to blacks.
The first article “We’re a Republic”, states that we the United States of America do indeed have a republic government. People tend to walk around believing that we are a democracy, but that’s only because they think of democracy in a different way. We see democracy as in we the people get the say in what the government does, when in fact true democracy is making decisions through voting or meetings. The Framers never intended for the United States be a democracy. They believed being a democracy was dangerous and not a good idea. The constitution clearly states that we are meant to be a republic, where representatives make the decisions for us. I agree, not only do we pledge to the republic but we also elect officials to speak and make decisions for us, which is basically what a republic consists of.
The democratization of American society that started in 1820s has led to a significant change of relations between government and people. These changes include growing equality of opportunities for white men and possibility for people to influence political processes taking place in the US. While people gained new rights and chances to start another life, government was, on the one hand, set under the growing pressure of society, and on the other hand, could be constructed by people.
Democracy in America, by Alexis de Tocqueville includes Tocqueville’s observations on what American society and culture was like during the 1830’s. Throughout his analysis of America, he draws many outlandish and interesting conclusions regarding what life was like during this time period. For example, in Chapter 18, Tocqueville remarks that citizens in democratic societies are independent, which makes them weak and subsequently uninfluential in society. He goes on to say that in order to combat this, associations must be established to combat individualism and to circulate new thoughts and ideas. All in all, Tocqueville’s claim is certainly valid, but only up to a certain point because there were a select few of individuals that were able to make an influence on society without the help from any associations.
Toqueville suggests that white men have the most power from compared to African Americans and Native Americans, but inferences that when African Americans will start to move away from their slave culture, it will be nightmare for the south. He makes a statement that soon, Native Americans will slowly die out, which is theoretically correct today. Toqueville’s observations and predictions were quite on par because today the population of Native Americans is extremely minimal, and the slave culture does not exist today in the United States, and is pretty much outlawed.
Alexis de Tocqueville and James Madison had two distinctly different philosophical views when it came to the problem of “majority tyranny.” In Tocqueville and the Tyranny of the Majority, Morton J. Horwitz discusses in length the writings of the Frenchman when he came to and became fascinated by America. Horowitz argues each man believes the public’s best interests and freedoms were being terrorized. The former (de Tocqueville) believed that society itself is a monster, but the latter (Madison) believed danger came from a temporarily impassioned majority making lasting decisions in government.
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.
Alexis de Tocqueville was born on July 29, 1805, in Paris, France. He was a historian, political scientist, and a politician, but he is best known as the author of Democracy in America. He began his political career as an apprentice magistrate, a role he was easily able to enter into due to his father’s role in French government. In the role of apprentice magistrate, Tocqueville witnessed the constitutional upheaval between the conservatives and liberals in France. With the inevitable decline of the aristocratic privilege on the horizon, he began to study the English political development. For Tocqueville, the July Revolution of 1830 and the resulting kingship of Louis Philippe of Orleans helped
Although liberty was explored in the Declaration of Independence and later in the Constitution, French politician and philosopher Alexis de Tocqueville best put into words why liberty is so important to the American people. He explained in his book, Democracy in America, that, “…defending [citizens'] rights against the encroachments of the government saves the common liberties of the country” (Galles). Tocqueville visited America in 1831 simply to study the nation’s prisons and consequently wrote Democracy in America after returning to France, in awe of the success of America’s democratic movement (“Alexis de Tocqueville”). He was
The concept of the separation of powers introduced in the American Constitution has been consistently praised throughout early academia as a check on the corruption and tyranny of the federal government. By distinguishing between state and national powers, policies are tailored to fit individual needs, and the personaliz+ed laws of each district collectively appeal to public interests. This statement, however, ignores the historical motives behind the separation of powers. In Slavery in the Structure of American Politics, Donald Robinson unveils the hidden background of American government that lies behind the nationalistic facade cultivated through education at the primary and secondary level. Compared to Hannah Arendt’s positive stance on the separation of powers in On Revolution, Robinson presents a more realistic analysis of the issue through the lenses of slavery and private interest.
Tocqueville’s Democracy in America arose out of the desire to understand the underlying reasons behind the difference between French and American democracies. While both societies have had moved towards democracy, New England, which Tocqueville defines as America, seems to be much more successful in organising a stable democratic society. As such, Democracy in America was written with the motive of mapping out how American society was