Introduction: Tocqueville’s Understanding of Tyranny
Tocqueville’s understanding of tyranny illuminates the subtle erosion of individual liberties within the framework of democratic societies, as he astutely observes the potential dangers of majority rule and the emergence of a “soft despotism.” The challenge inherent in any democratic system lies in the potential for the majority, once in power, to wield absolute authority. This circumstance often presents the temptation for the majority to dominate when governing, potentially leading to tyrannical rule. To counteract this tendency, certain measures must be in place to curb the potential tyranny of the majority. During Alexis de Tocqueville’s visit to the United States, he identified two crucial phenomena that, while having both merits and demerits for American democracy, played significant roles. In his influential work, “Democracy in America,” Tocqueville explores the various strengths and weaknesses of the U.S. democratic system, particularly focusing on the impact of the majority and religion in safeguarding liberty and individual freedom.
Tocqueville’s Understanding of Tyranny
Tocqueville posits that, concerning the tyranny of the majority, justice should be grounded in the collective perspective of humanity rather than exclusive to one nation. In a democratic system, the ascendancy of the majority signifies the unrestrained exercise of power without adequate checks and balances. All three branches of government—legislature, executive, and judiciary—may fall under the sway of the majority, resulting in unchecked power that can lead to the suppression of freedom and free expression, breeding tyranny.
However, Tocqueville suggests that if the judiciary maintains independence from the other two branches, a well-functioning democratic government can be established without the peril of tyranny (Tocqueville, 2). In essence, he argues that an independent judiciary mitigates the risk of tyranny, as it possesses the authority to intervene and prevent its occurrence.
Tocqueville’s Understanding of Tyranny: Checks
While the tyranny of the majority in America is somewhat constrained, Tocqueville contends that it remains unchecked in the realms of individual freedom and freedom of expression. This lack of restraint is particularly evident as individuals hesitate to go against societal norms and conventions dictated by the majority. In the United States, any bold dissenting individual risks facing ostracism by the majority.
Furthermore, Tocqueville highlights how this environment stifles both freedom of expression in speeches and writing. He quotes an individual who observes that a free thinker may have the freedom to live but is likely to feel like “a stranger among your people” (4). Tocqueville argues that this societal response is a contributing factor to the absence of great writers emerging in America, as few can endure such treatment by society.
Tocqueville’s Understanding of Tyranny: Checks of Religion
Religion plays a pivotal role in curbing the tyranny of the majority in two significant ways. Firstly, it has been deliberately separated from political life and governmental associations, limiting its influence to clergy and women. As Christian morality is consistent worldwide and is practiced both in America and globally, it is natural for people to adhere to Christian principles. By keeping clergy at a distance from political affairs, they garner respect within society, and women, as custodians of Christian morals, play a crucial role in preserving these values.
The separation of religion from politics allows individuals to find solace at home amidst the tumult of political upheavals and work life. Consequently, a balanced individual emerges the next day. Tocqueville argues that religion serves as a restraint, as individuals learn moral values at home and apply them in their political lives. This, he asserts, facilitates the utilization of “freedom” and acts as a check against the tyranny of the majority on the minority, with clergy abstaining from political involvement and avoiding entanglements in political disputes.
Conclusion: Tocqueville’s Understanding of Tyranny
In essence, Tocqueville’s perspective on the majority and its potential for tyranny suggests that the United States has not produced great free thinkers comparable to Europe during his time. However, the separation of church and state in America has played a crucial role in preserving both religion and freedom. Tocqueville contends that the church’s involvement in temporal power alongside the state would attract animosity from the public and politicians, as indicated by the political fervor it generates (10).
In contrast, the clergy’s decision to distance themselves from politics earns them respect in society. Consequently, the influence of religion in the United States contributes to the promotion of peace and hope. These sentiments act as powerful restraints, dissuading individuals from engaging in tyrannical behavior towards their fellow human beings. This, according to Tocqueville, is how the passion for peace and hope serves as a check on the potential tyranny of the majority in America.
Reference: Tocqueville’s Understanding of Tyranny
- Tocqueville, A. de. (1835). Democracy in America (H. C. Mansfield & D. Winthrop, Eds. and Trans.). University of Chicago Press. Retrieved from https://press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/805328.html
Relevant Questions about Tocqueville’s Understanding of Tyranny
- How does Tocqueville perceive the potential for tyranny in democratic societies, particularly in the context of the majority’s rule?
- In what ways does Tocqueville argue that the separation of church and state in the United States serves as a check on the tyranny of the majority?
- How does Tocqueville’s observations on individual freedom and expression in the United States contribute to his broader understanding of the dangers associated with the tyranny of the majority?
