Essay 83: “How Democratic Institutions And Customs Tend To Raise The Cost And Shorten The Eleventh Of Leases”, “Influence Of Democracy On Wages” & “Influence Of Democracy On The Family” (Vol. 2 Pt. 3 Chs. 6, 7 & 8)

Essay Read by Constituting America Founder, Actress Janine Turner
The essays in our study reference the following edition of Democracy In America: University of Chicago Press – 1st edition translated by Harvey Mansfield and Delba Winthrop. Today’s essay references pages 553 – start at chapter 6 heading) – 563 (stop at chapter 9 heading) of this edition of Democracy in America.
Alexis De Tocqueville came to America in the 1830s. At that point industrialism had already made significant progress in Europe. In the United States, industrialization would not really explode until after the Civil War in the 1860s. In the first two chapters considered here De Tocqueville seems to be anticipating American industrialization. De Tocqueville ponders how, as a democracy, America’s economy will develop differently than that of aristocratic Europe.
Economically, America was distinct from Europe in two important ways, according to De Tocqueville. First, America had vast expanses of undeveloped land. Land was relatively easy to acquire. Also, America had rejected the aristocratic practice of primogeniture, the notion that all land is inherited by the eldest son. Put these two notions together, you get an America without enormous estates that pass undivided from one generation to the next. Any grand estates in America get divided amongst all children (at the least the males, in this era) and anyone seeking land can acquire it cheaply.
America simply did not have the entrenched wealth that existed in Europe. Entry into agriculture or industry was relatively easy, De Tocqueville argues. He channels James Madison’s arguments Federalist 10 wherein Madison argues that the commercial society of America will produce a diversity of economic interests. In America there will not be the landed few against the landless many. America is the land of entrepreneurship, we might say.
For this reason, De Tocqueville thinks wages will be high in America. With many employment opportunities available to laborers, employers have to treat employees well or the employees can simply leave for another job. In De Tocqueville’s time there was an emerging economic vision in America called “free labor”. The free labor ideology held that the best economy was one where each person could easily set to work on his own, essentially becoming a small business owner. This might be a small farm, a small shop, a small factory. Free labor thinkers opposed slavery as they saw it as an institution that favored large landowners over more modest operations. The mantra of the free labor movement was “Free soil, free labor, free speech, free men.”
De Tocqueville does warn against the dangers of centralization of economic power. Anticipating American industrialism of the late nineteenth century, De Tocqueville worries that most laborers will simply be wage earners, i.e., they will work for someone else. This is contrary to the free labor idea that most people will work for themselves. Those who work for wages lose some of the habits of self-government. Also, as economic power consolidates, it gives employers more power to dictate wages. Workers may have to band together to press their case. In this sense, De Tocqueville foresees the rise of labor unions.
This discussion of economics dovetails in a peculiar way with one of the most provocative chapters in all of Democracy in America, namely his chapter on the democratic family. De Tocqueville, in his discussion of economics, has suggested a fluidity in American circumstances that stands in stark contrast to aristocratic Europe. In America, life is in constant motion, what De Tocqueville sometimes calls an “inquietude” or a kind of unsettled state. Family is not exempt from such forces.
The aristocratic family is governed by tradition and usually affiliated with a particular place. Aristocratic families are typically dominated by a father, a patriarch whose family has lived in the same house for many generations. Being first born son offers definite privileges. Familial relations are often cold and formal. Even as children reach adulthood, the father still rules over them.
None of this is so in the democratic family. Think of the typical family in a television comedy show. This is essentially what De Tocqueville sees coming for the democratic family. Democracy is uneasy with tradition, established forms, authority that does not arise from consent. De Tocqueville describes the democratic family as being less hierarchical, less formal, more naturally affectionate. We might think of American families today. How many of us call our father and mother “sir” or “ma’am”? We usually use informal terms such as “dad” and “mom.” When American children grow older, they set out on their own. They now view themselves as equal to their parents. The idea that grown adults would still be subservient to their father strikes us as odd.
De Tocqueville is uncertain whether the democratic family represents a gain or a loss. While he is sure that as individuals we benefit from a more loving, affectionate family, he speculates that society may be worse for this change. The “inquietude” of democracy leaves Americans adrift, unable to find steady sources of meaning. It is just this divorce from traditional sources of meaning such as religion and family that makes De Tocqueville fear that democracies are more, not less, susceptible to despotism. While we may have more affection in our lives, the breakdown of family may leave us democrats looking to the government as a substitute parent.
Jon D. Schaff is Professor of Political Science at Northern State University in Aberdeen, South Dakota, where he has taught since 2001. He teaches classes in American political thought, American political institutions, as well as politics in literature and film. He is author of multiple articles and book chapters as well as two books: Abraham Lincoln and the Limits of Liberal Democracy and Age of Anxiety: Meaning, Identity, and Politics in 21st Century Literature and Film (co-authored with Anthony Wachs). He co-edited Humanitas History of America II: From Revolution to Reconstruction, 2 Vols for Classical Academic Press.
Click here to receive our Daily 90-Day Study Essay emailed directly to your inbox.
Click here for the essay schedule with today’s essay and previously published essays hyperlinked.




Hello! I’m Janine Turner, founder of Constituting America!
“De Tocqueville is uncertain whether the democratic family represents a gain or a loss. While he is sure that as individuals we benefit from a more loving, affectionate family, he speculates that society may be worse for this change. The “inquietude” of democracy leaves Americans adrift, unable to find steady sources of meaning. It is just this divorce from traditional sources of meaning such as religion and family that makes De Tocqueville fear that democracies are more, not less, susceptible to despotism. While we may have more affection in our lives, the breakdown of family may leave us democrats looking to the government as a substitute parent.”
I find this paragraph to be the most intriguing, Especially these two lines “leaves Americans adrift” and “looking to the government as a substitute parent.” I certainly believe this has happened.
What do you think?