Essay 24: On Political Association in the United States (Vol. 1 Pt. 2 Ch.4) of Democracy in America by Alexis De Tocqueville
Essay Read by Constituting America Founder, Actress Janine Turner
Alexis de Tocqueville On Political Association in the United States:
By Michael C. Maibach
In Democracy in America, De Tocqueville dedicates a chapter to “Political Association in the United States.” “The right of association is an English import, and has existed in America since the beginning… Of all the countries in the world, America has taken greatest advantage of association and has applied this powerful means of action to the greatest variety of objectives…
[The American] learns from birth that he must rely on himself to struggle against the evils and obstacles of life.” De Tocqueville has come from the Age of Aristocracy to visit the new Age of Equality. Here he found gone the safeguards of royal order, social standing, and the family name. In this classless society “In the United States, they associate for the goals of public security, commerce and industry, morality, and religion.” De Tocqueville coins the word “individualism” when writing of America. That word alone explains the deep desire of Americans to form voluntary leagues of all manner and size – what Burke called “little platoons.”
“After the press, association is the great means that parties use to get into public affairs to gain the majority. In America, the freedom of association for political ends is unlimited… An association consists of public support by individuals to a doctrine and the promise… of making those doctrines prevail.” Free speech engenders free association, which engenders the freedom of assembly. “There, men see each other; the means of action combine; opinions are expressed with the force and heat that written thought can never attain.” From assembly, parties may be formed – like a nation inside a nation. And it is parties who elect to office those who will make the changes around which all this gathering has inspired.
In America, he writes, political assemblies “do not have… the right to make laws; but they have the power to attack the one that exists and to formulate in advance the one that should exist.” American assemblies exist to lead opinions to change, not to force change through the violence of the mob. “In America, there are factious persons, but no conspirators.” His example is the 1831 Philadelphia convention convened around the Nullification Crisis. While Americans did not turn to violence then, it was ironically a forerunner to the Civil War of 1860 when political assemblies so sharply divided did come to blows.
De Tocqueville writes, “In America associations can never pretend to represent the majority; they only aim to convince it. They do not want to act, but to persuade; in that they are different from the political associations of Europe.” Why? “Of all the causes that cooperate in the United States to moderate the violence of political association, perhaps the most powerful is universal suffrage.” Because male citizens could cast a vote, those elected to office had a deep legitimacy under the designs of the Constitution. “In countries where universal suffrage is accepted, the majority is never doubtful.” The loyal opposition can write, debate, associate and assemble – but using force is never justified given the basic fairness of universal suffrage. “In America, the purpose of associations is to convince and not to compel.”
In sharp contrast, De Tocqueville writes that “In Europe, there are almost no associations that do not claim that they represent the will of the majority… Most Europeans still see in association a weapon of war… the thought of acting next preoccupies all minds. An association does not want to convince, but to fight… In Europe, associations consider themselves in a way as the legislative and executive council of the nation, which itself cannot raise its voice; starting from this idea, they act and command. In America, where in the eyes of all they represent only a minority of the nation, they speak and petition,” not act.
In summary, De Tocqueville’s thesis is that America’s universal suffrage – the idea of free and fair elections – has the great benefit of creating “the loyal opposition” we see in our political assemblies. They talk, assemble, petition, and campaign… they do not tear down the house. They do not turn to violence or law breaking.
But all of this could be at risk today. Americans’ faith in universal suffrage, in “election integrity” has become a significant issue for our Nation. Until a few years ago US election practices did not include ‘early voting,’ ‘ballot harvesting,’ ‘drop boxes’… and the repeal of voter ID requirements. In Virginia we have gone from Election Day to 145 days of early voting! Party poll watchers can monitor voting on Election Day. It is simply impossible for any party to monitor the polls for 145 days.
De Tocqueville closes by writing – “There are no countries where associations are more necessary to prevent the despotism of parties or the arbitrariness of the prince than those in which the social state is democratic. In aristocratic nations, secondary bodies form natural associations that halt abuses of power. In countries where such associations do not exist…a great people can be oppressed with impunity by a handful of factious persons or by one man.” Considering this, America cannot afford to have the mainstay of our faith in self-government undermined by radical, non-transparent election reforms combined with open borders. At some point public trust in our political system will be lost.
Michael C. Maibach is a Trustee and Managing Director of the James Wilson Institute and a Distinguished Fellow On American Federalism at Save Our States.
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 and thanks for joining our blog! I’m Janine Turner, founder of Constituting America!
This chapter of De Tocqueville’s “Democracy in America” is fascinating. It builds upon our freedom of speech with the corresponding freedom to assemble.
DeTocqueville focuses on how we, as Americans, strive to resolve our differences through speech and assembly by persuasion — not war (like in Europe — fascinating comparison on this in his passage in the book…).
De Tocqueville’s sentence that I find most thought provoking is that with solely freedom of speech and press there is still a lack of seeing one another face to face. He writes, “[re assembly] “There men see each other; means of execution are combined and opinions deployed with the force and heat that written thought can never attain.” Isn’t this fascinating?
Today, many of us are dreadfully concerned about social media and the lack of face to face interactions. I’ve never really considered that with the newspapers and pamphlets in the days of yore there was also the potential for a lack of face to face interaction.
I do believe, due to the emergence of radio, tv and apps, we are even less likely to commune in person, yet it is of note that this element of meeting together in an assembly was always an effort, and a pertinent aspect in regard to attaining effective persuasion in the political process!
Our fabulous guest essayist, Michael Maibach makes many insightful points on the De Tocqueville passage! What are your thoughts?
Spread the word! Together: let’s take Americans on a deeper journey of learning because “History Holds the Key to the Future!”
All my best, Janine
My state representative’s district has 60,000 people. During the 40 days of session in Georgia (mid-January to end-March), he holds weekly Saturday morning meetings at a local coffee shop. Only about six of us are regulars; once or twice 10-15 may show up. County Republican party meetings usually have about 25 or so regulars out of about 250,000 residents. Veteran organizations’ memberships are about 50% of their peak about 30 years ago; and of those members, only about 10% are active participants. At the same time, few people read newspapers and magazines today, getting all their news in the privacy of their homes digitally and being careful not to share opinions in public fora for fear of being attacked for opinions they express. I wonder how Tocqueville would assess the importance of Associations and freedom of speech in America today.