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 187-192 (stop at heading Influence that American Democracy Exerts on Electoral Laws).
Please leave a comment in the blog below and automatically be entered in our weekly drawing for a free copy of the book!
De Tocqueville’s Democracy in America is known for its conversational writing about culture, government, and politics. But like all thinkers who blend theory and observations, De Tocqueville can be tricky. It is important to read De Tocqueville slowly and carefully so that we understand the full implications of his arguments.
At the beginning of the chapter, De Tocqueville gives us a hint about what is to come. He wrote, “I know here I am walking on ground that is afire. Each word of this chapter must offend on some points the different parties that divide my country. I shall not speak less than all my thought” (187).
What a remarkable introduction. He tells his readers that he knows his arguments are controversial, so much so that the topics he is about to discuss are on fire! While his opinions will offend almost everyone, he promises honesty in his analysis. These eye-opening sentences place the reader on high alert. We must proceed with caution.
What are De Tocqueville’s shocking revelations? First, he asserts that “in the United States, the most remarkable men are rarely called to public offices” (188). Why is this? Tocqueville argues that although many citizens in a democracy are well-meaning, they don’t know how to achieve the goals they desire (188). Also, democracy encourages envy in its citizens due to the powerful sentiment of equality (189). De Tocqueville comments that Americans “do not fear great talents, but they have little taste for them” (189). Democracy encourages talented citizens to shun a political career, since the vast majority of the electorate does not want them and oftentimes, they have better things to do, such as pursue private wealth.
This seems like a very dismal conclusion from De Tocqueville. If this is the case, then perhaps we should stop reading Democracy in America. The United States is a representative democracy. If democracy does not encourage good people to enter public service as representatives, then it seems as though democracy has no chance of succeeding.
However, it’s important to keep reading. Remember the beginning of the chapter. De Tocqueville likes to make brash statements which catch the attention of a reader. His style is similar to a top-selling thriller writer, who ends each chapter with a scary cliffhanger.
The first sentence of the next section indicates De Tocqueville is about to shift gears. He begins with this pronouncement: “When great perils threaten the state, one often sees the people fortunately choose the most appropriate citizens to save it” (190).
Wait one second! Didn’t De Tocqueville just argue that a problem of democracy is that its citizens don’t choose “remarkable men” for office? This is why De Tocqueville can be puzzling at times. He likes to make bold observations, and then provide counter arguments.
De Tocqueville has at least three caveats to offer, which challenge his pronouncement that representative democracy is endangered. First, when difficult circumstances present themselves, De Tocqueville argues that citizens in a democracy tend to select the best people to lead. This is a big qualification to his earlier argument. After all, the most critical time for a democracy to select the best people is during a crisis. If democracies succeed in picking qualified leaders at these moments, then much of the earlier concerns noted by De Tocqueville may not be valid.
Second, the “mores” (or culture) of a location affect the quality of government (191). De Tocqueville viewed the New England states as the best prepared in this regard, largely because they are the oldest functioning democracies in the United States (191). They’ve had more years to practice democracy, and as it turns out, they’ve gotten better at it over time. This seems a temporary problem, which should resolve as democracies age.
Lastly, De Tocqueville argues that America’s constitutional design is also helpful. While the House of Representatives attracts less distinguished individuals, the Senate is elevated in its membership and rejects “small passions” that can frustrate the public good (192). The bicameral legislative structure seems to mitigate some of the bigger worries De Tocqueville had about representative democracy.
So, which argument is correct? Is it the first notion that democracy frustrates or inhibits the selection of qualified citizens for public office, thus dooming it to failure? Or can we find hope in the second argument, which offers a much more positive assessment about democracy’s future?
Of course, that is why De Tocqueville is such a complicated thinker about democracy. He doesn’t provide all the answers. It’s up to you, the careful reader, to decide. De Tocqueville wants you to keep reading, and to apply your knowledge of history to evaluate his observations.
Remember, De Tocqueville wrote the first volume of Democracy in America in 1835. He could only study and observe about fifty years of American history to frame his opinions. Now, the United States has been a democracy for five times longer than that. This makes studying De Tocqueville today more relevant and compelling than ever.
Dr. Colleen Shogan, 11th Archivist of the United 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.