Democracy in America

Tocqueville concedes that only God can understand every individual, and dependence on general ideas is typical of most people. He is personally ambivalent about this, observing, “General ideas are admirable in that they permit the human mind to bring rapid judgments to a great number of objects at one time; but on the other hand, they never provide it with anything but incomplete notions” (411). Generalities increase understanding, but only to a point. Tocqueville observes, however, that general ways of thinking grow as democracy does, because individuals become more alike and citizens feel they resemble one another.

As they turn away from traditions that come from class structures, individuals will form opinions based on humanity as a whole. Social and economic life in a democracy further lends itself to this, as “[m]en who live in centuries of equality have much curiosity and little leisure; their life is so practical, so complicated, so agitated, so active that little time remains to them for thinking” (414). In democracy individuals seek quick gratification, which further enhances their dependence on overarching concepts.

Tocqueville argues that the French have been interested in political generalities precisely because few people can wield actual political power. In America the antidote to overall general thinking is found through political participation for all people, because “they will then be forced to enter into the details, and the details will make them perceive the weak sides of the theory” (416). Tocqueville maintains his strong belief that political participation is essential to a democracy, seen most prominently in his earlier work about the vital nature of township governance to New England’s political culture.

Tocqueville argues that “fixed ideas” about God are very useful for people as they provide blueprints for moral action (417). Furthermore, most people are not capable of using reason to fully understand abstract and profound moral truths about the universe. Religions, in short, “furnish a solution for each of these primordial questions that is clear, precise, intelligible to the crowd, and very lasting” (418). Tocqueville argues that loss of religion results in a kind of moral paralysis, as citizens cannot resolve large issues. He insists that this is particularly true for democratic citizens. Religious faith also counterbalances the tendency of democratic citizens to be preoccupied with “the love of material enjoyments” (419). He reiterates his belief that separation from politics allows religious faith to remain strong and undamaged. Tocqueville argues that religious leaders should also not strongly oppose the pursuit of material wealth. He argues that American clergy are particularly successful in not opposing themselves to matters of majority consensus in politics.