Keeping Our Republic
Adapted from article first printed in Kansas City Star, 3/4/06, and entitled "Has U.S. really changed much since 1800s?"
He's quoted from one end of the political spectrum to the other. But few Americans have likely heard of him. His views are used to support a variety of positions regarding the judicial system, the press, class structure, racism, money, and the role of government.
Alexis de Tocqueville, after more than 150 years, remains one of the most perceptive observers of America and its people. This French aristocrat traveled through the United States in the 1830s. He later wrote Democracy in America, a two-volume study of Americans and their political institutions.
In 2006 the political party of Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt (the Republicans) has morphed into something quite extraordinary, it seems to me. In the process of "transforming" itself, it now runs an American government that is arguably the most incompetent and corrupt in more than 75 years. Is it merely God punishing the United States for its sins, as at least one television evangelist has offered? I think not. It's far less ethereal.
In the 1830s de Tocqueville saw a contradiction in America. He believed a power of the majority was needed to maintain democracy, but at the same time he worried that a "tyranny" of this same majority could also destroy democracy.
This paradox he suggested could survive by maintaining a carefully constructed system of checks and balances, which we learned in school--or should have--meant our three separate but equal branches of government. Still, de Tocqueville warned, "even then the tyranny of the majority may not be unavoidable."
Today, two of de Tocqueville's observations seem to me to be especially thought provoking, keeping in mind they were made when our country was less than 50 years old. He observed that Americans had a "common knowledge" about public affairs. In other words they were astute, involved in public life, and politically aware. This quality he believed was essential for a working democratic system.
The second observation, perhaps more curious, was that de Tocqueville wondered about what he thought might be the tyranny of opinion. He said he could not think of another country with "less independence of mind and true freedom of discussion" than America. He believed that democracy could very easily have a leveling or flattening effect on intellectual and individualistic distinctions.
What might de Tocqueville have to say about America today? Would he think of us as politically astute? Would he be impressed by our civic gravitas and our involvement in public life? Is it possible, however, that de Tocqueville would view us as gleefully ignorant, intellectually shallow, and easily manipulated? We'll never know of course.
Are we today, as de Tocqueville once observed long ago, a country with less independence of mind and true freedom of discussion? Do we not have an abundance of "discussions" today? After all, we have thousands of newspapers and magazines; we have dozens of television news channels providing us with endless arguments and debates.
But is it possible that we Americans have created one of the most successful illusions that any society has ever devised? Do well-coifed info-entertainers on television actually tell us anything we haven't heard numerous times in one form or another. Does the endless supply of the same talking heads, which appear on one channel after another, really give us a fresh perspective about much of anything, regardless of whether or not they call themselves liberal or conservative? Do the majority of the mainstream newspapers ever step beyond the same, safe, smug orthodoxy?
Is it conceivable that de Tocqueville would say that we are today merrily indifferent to any new ideas ... merely frightened of them ... or possibly unaware of them? We'll never know of course.
John Adams, one of our Founding Fathers, said, "Gentlemen, you have a republic if you can keep it." To me it remains in doubt whether we can.
More ominous are the words of Patrick Henry: "The liberties of a people never were, nor ever will be secure, when the transactions of their rulers [representatives] may be concealed from them."
America is now becoming, and we all should be extremely worried about what it may ultimately become.
He's quoted from one end of the political spectrum to the other. But few Americans have likely heard of him. His views are used to support a variety of positions regarding the judicial system, the press, class structure, racism, money, and the role of government.
Alexis de Tocqueville, after more than 150 years, remains one of the most perceptive observers of America and its people. This French aristocrat traveled through the United States in the 1830s. He later wrote Democracy in America, a two-volume study of Americans and their political institutions.
In 2006 the political party of Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt (the Republicans) has morphed into something quite extraordinary, it seems to me. In the process of "transforming" itself, it now runs an American government that is arguably the most incompetent and corrupt in more than 75 years. Is it merely God punishing the United States for its sins, as at least one television evangelist has offered? I think not. It's far less ethereal.
In the 1830s de Tocqueville saw a contradiction in America. He believed a power of the majority was needed to maintain democracy, but at the same time he worried that a "tyranny" of this same majority could also destroy democracy.
This paradox he suggested could survive by maintaining a carefully constructed system of checks and balances, which we learned in school--or should have--meant our three separate but equal branches of government. Still, de Tocqueville warned, "even then the tyranny of the majority may not be unavoidable."
Today, two of de Tocqueville's observations seem to me to be especially thought provoking, keeping in mind they were made when our country was less than 50 years old. He observed that Americans had a "common knowledge" about public affairs. In other words they were astute, involved in public life, and politically aware. This quality he believed was essential for a working democratic system.
The second observation, perhaps more curious, was that de Tocqueville wondered about what he thought might be the tyranny of opinion. He said he could not think of another country with "less independence of mind and true freedom of discussion" than America. He believed that democracy could very easily have a leveling or flattening effect on intellectual and individualistic distinctions.
What might de Tocqueville have to say about America today? Would he think of us as politically astute? Would he be impressed by our civic gravitas and our involvement in public life? Is it possible, however, that de Tocqueville would view us as gleefully ignorant, intellectually shallow, and easily manipulated? We'll never know of course.
Are we today, as de Tocqueville once observed long ago, a country with less independence of mind and true freedom of discussion? Do we not have an abundance of "discussions" today? After all, we have thousands of newspapers and magazines; we have dozens of television news channels providing us with endless arguments and debates.
But is it possible that we Americans have created one of the most successful illusions that any society has ever devised? Do well-coifed info-entertainers on television actually tell us anything we haven't heard numerous times in one form or another. Does the endless supply of the same talking heads, which appear on one channel after another, really give us a fresh perspective about much of anything, regardless of whether or not they call themselves liberal or conservative? Do the majority of the mainstream newspapers ever step beyond the same, safe, smug orthodoxy?
Is it conceivable that de Tocqueville would say that we are today merrily indifferent to any new ideas ... merely frightened of them ... or possibly unaware of them? We'll never know of course.
John Adams, one of our Founding Fathers, said, "Gentlemen, you have a republic if you can keep it." To me it remains in doubt whether we can.
More ominous are the words of Patrick Henry: "The liberties of a people never were, nor ever will be secure, when the transactions of their rulers [representatives] may be concealed from them."
America is now becoming, and we all should be extremely worried about what it may ultimately become.
posted by mumpsimus | 9:12 AM
|
1 comments
