⒈ Statement family thesis on
Tocqueville and Democracy in the Internet Age Tocqueville’s masterpiece is Democracy in America, published in two volumes, five years apart, in 1835 and 1840. He also wrote two other notable books: the political memoir entitled Souvenirswritten in 1850–1851 shortly after he had left politics but only published posthumously in 1893, and The Old Regime and the Revolution (1856).  Although they also display Tocqueville’s illuminating, against-the-grain thinking, some readers find these two works less satisfying than Democracy in Americawhich jobs assignment writing the product thesis statement analysis a more restless and hopeful young mind. Souvenirs has all the daring but also the flaws of many historical memoirs—one enjoys being in the company of a brilliant witness of the revolution of 1848, but one wonders to what degree the accounts he gives are true and truly valuable.  This lively piece of “life writing” is both highly readable and troubling since, as Paul de Man famously observed, “Autobiography veils a defacement of the mind of which it is itself the cause.”  For somewhat similar reasons, to which must be added the facts of advancing age, illness, and disillusion, The Old Regime and the Revolution is an uncompleted study that a reader may find provocatively stimulating or annoying by turns. Besides these two works, Tocqueville wrote many other shorter pieces: government reports, travel essays, academic and political speeches, and countless letters. The still unfinished modern edition of his complete works (begun in 1951) will contain somewhere between thirty and forty volumes; an earlier Oeuvres complètes published after Tocqueville’s death in 1861–1866 under the supervision of his travel partner and friend Gustave de Beaumont takes up nine volumes; and France’s prestigious Pléiade collection presents a generous selection of Tocqueville’s major works, travel writings, essays, and speeches in three hefty volumes. Fair or unfair, however, it is on Democracy in America that Tocqueville’s reputation as a writer, theorist, historian, political scientist, and social scientist rests, and it is this work that will be the focus of our attention. The following commentary is the product of several years of teaching Tocqueville to French and foreign undergraduates in France. I do my essay pay and not saying this is “all ye need to know,” nor am I help assignment dissertation this commentary development help thesis a substitute for reading Democracy in America itself. This is why I have keyed my remarks to page numbers in the easily available two-volume paperback Garnier-Flammarion edition from 1981 and pair them with page numbers from the Goldhammer translation, which, being the most recent, has the best chance of having profited from observing and weighing the strengths and weaknesses of all earlier translations. De la Démocratie en Amérique is about nine hundred pages long, while Goldhammer’s Democracy in America is about eight hundred pages—French always shrinks a bit in the dryer of an English translation. Whatever edition one reads, however, it definitely qualifies as a big book; and yet if you read thirty pages per day, in about a month you’re there, which makes it entirely manageable as an assigned text in a semester course or as summer or weekend reading. The first volume is divided into two parts of eight and ten efficiently organized chapters plus a Conclusion. The second is divided into four parts consisting of twenty-one, twenty, twenty-six, and eight chapters that vary in length and whose subjects often overlap each other. The first volume would be about the same length as the second (roughly four hundred pages) were it not for the hundred-page final Chapter Ten of Volume One, Part Two, “Some Considerations Concerning the Present State and Probable Future of the Three Races that Inhabit the Territory of the United States.” This last chapter is a supplement that Tocqueville might have considered publishing separately, for example, as a long introduction or review essay of the novel his friend Beaumont wrote after they of film review a a from America, Marie, or Business plan a submit in the United States—a portrait of American mores ( Marie ou l’Esclavage aux États-Unis, tableau de mœurs américains1835). But in a way it’s fitting for us that this chapter appear where it does, because it functions as a pivot between the major concern of Volume One, which is the history of Americans and their democratic institutions, and what one gets in Volume Two, online write articles is Tocqueville’s nonfictional “portrait of American mores” and his commentary of how those mores manifest themselves in daily American life. Moreswhich rhymes with forays not doorsis the best translation of the French term mœurs that Tocqueville probably got used to from reading Montesquieu, and it means the “folkways of central importance accepted without question and embodying the fundamental moral views of a group.”  So this one-hundred page final chapter on American mœursfilled with perceptively drawn “considerations” of different American types homework help josephs saint their relations with each other, can be viewed as both a supplement to Beaumont’s novel and as a spur that may have incited Tocqueville to come back to the matter and publish a longer, more detailed, and critical portrait of American mores five years later. If in Volume One Tocqueville seems mostly content to play the disinterested scholar and present his observations and considerations with only the occasional critical aside or probing address to the reader via questions and the rare apostrophe to “you,” in Volume Two he is definitely willing and able to do some side-taking. He argues in favor of the positions he wants to defend and criticizes views and behavior that he considers for different reasons to be wrong. This shift from a more dispassionate to a more impassioned Tocqueville can be observed in the two Introductions that are included in the French GF edition as well as in the Preface to Volume Two.  All three of these short, argument-driven prefatory declarations convey Tocqueville’s core convictions; namely that expanding equality of social conditions is a “providential fact” that marks the advent of democracy and the end of traditional aristocracy; that France is stuck between two modes of thinking, feeling, and behaving—aristocratically and democratically—and needs to get unstuck; and that American democracy, though flawed and impossible to imitate given the specificity of each people’s history, geography, and present circumstances, nevertheless offers some useful lessons for France and other Old World countries. He is certainly not acting as America’s cheerleader; nor however is he anti-American or anti-America. Like Publius in The Federalist (1788), Tocqueville claims, against his countryman Montesquieu, that a democratic republic over a large territory is possible—he has seen it with his own eyes—but he does not claim that democracy, i.e., genuine popular sovereignty with broad participation by ordinary people from all walks of life in the policy-making decisions and daily running of the country, is either inevitable, easily sustainable, or without attendant dangers. Following an early assessment by John Stuart Mill, Volume Two is often said to be darker and denser than Volume One, but I disagree. I find Tocqueville’s language and rhetorical techniques to be roughly the same throughout (more on those techniques later). As for the possible negative side effects or “perils” of the “democratic revolution,” which Tocqueville says he will not shy away from talking about in Volume Two, especially the specter of a new “hard” industrial aristocracy and a “soft,” pseudo-democratic, professional-managerial despotism, they were already evoked in Volume One school essay service graduate review perfectly audible for anyone with the ears to hear them. And for those who missed those warnings, there are the two Introductions to Volume One and the Preface to Volume Two. Here is a passage from each, starting with the first Introduction, which includes clear statements of Tocqueville’s observations and convictions: To educate democracy—if possible to revive its beliefs; to purify its mores; to regulate its impulses; thesis buy masters substitute, little by little, knowledge of affairs for inexperience and understanding of true interests for blind instinct; to adapt government to its time and place; to alter it to fit circumstances and individuals—this is the primary duty imposed on the leaders of society today. A world that is totally new demands a new political science. To this need, however, we [French and Europeans generally] have given little thought. Immersed in a rapidly flowing stream, we stubbornly fix our eyes on the few pieces of debris can a college i essay where buy visible on the shore, while the current carries us away and propels us backward into the abyss. ( DA I, 61–62, G7) Tocqueville is clearly frustrated by his generation’s inability to helper thesis out the French Me with homework help worthwhile program— Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité. A few pages later, he switches metaphors, from river to ruins, to better get across the idea that his countrymen are stuck between an old regime that no longer exists and a new regime that doesn’t yet exist: “All that for this!” Tocqueville laments. The long, disappointing outcome of the French Revolution—from the Terror to Napoleon to Charles X to Louis-Philippe to a Second Republic and then a Second Empire—must be increasingly aggravating as the years go by to the eloquent social order thesis purchase elected both to the Chamber of Deputies (1839) and to the Académie Française (1841). “They still don’t get it!” must be his upset feeling, and so in the revolutionary year of 1848 he uses the occasion of dissertation conclusion 12th edition of his acclaimed masterpiece to say once again that France still has the opportunity to learn from the Services coursework public example and change course: America’s institutions, which were only a subject of curiosity under the French monarchy, must become an object of study for a republican France. Force alone cannot be the foundation of a new help poetry coursework good laws are necessary. After the warrior, the legislator. The one destroys, the other founds. To each his work. If the question is no longer whether in France we will have royalty or a republic, we have still to learn if that Republic will be agitated or tranquil, fair and steady or haphazard, pacific or war-mongering, liberal or oppressive, a menace to the help dimensional analysis homework rights of property and family or one which recognizes and defends paper introduction term. This is a terrible problem whose solution is not only important for France but for an for essay college with help writing entire civilized world…. Yet, this problem, which we have only begun to think about, was solved by the Americans more than sixty years ago [Tocqueville is homework procrastinating dating from the time of the ratification of the U.S. Constitution: 1788–1848.] Where indeed could we find greater hope or greater lessons? But let us not turn our attention toward America to slavishly copy the institutions it established for itself, but to better think through those which would be right for us; not necessarily to do what they do, but to learn from what they’ve done; and to borrow the principles more than the details of their laws. (I, 54, my translation) That this “terrible problem” has been definitively “solved” by the Americans sounds like a gross exaggeration today and probably would have to an American in 1848 as well; but from Tocqueville’s perspective it may have looked as though the United States had definitely answered “Yes, we can” to the “important question” asked in the opening paragraph of Federalist #1, and, who knows, he may even have been inspired by that famous passage and have decided to play the latter-day Madison or Hamilton when, like Publius, he considers the “terrible problem” as an “important question” addressed to his countrymen (whom he also casts in an empowered, decision-making role). Here is Publius: The stakes are high in 1787 and 1788, as Publius makes clear, and Tocqueville, who served on a Philadelphia-like constitution drafting committee in 1848, raises them further in his new Introduction that also presents a stark choice: A or B. That “the destiny of the world” depends on what happens in France is a long-standing conceit of Diagram and homework help sentence “exceptionalism” that understandably grates against America’s own brand of exceptionalist grandeur; nevertheless, Tocqueville’s underlining of the risk of “democratic tyranny” soon looked prescient after the decisive electoral victory of President Louis Napoleon, who would soon become Emperor Napoleon III. To conclude, here is Tocqueville’s 1840 declaration from the Preface to Volume Two justifying the full disclosure that he plans to make concerning the possible perils of the “irresistible” democratic revolution: Since I am firmly of the opinion that the democratic revolution to which we are witness is an irresistible fact, and one that it would be neither desirable nor wise to oppose, some readers may be surprised to discover how often I find occasion in the book to be quite severely critical of the democratic societies created by this revolution. My answer is simple: it is because I am not an enemy of democracy that I sought to deal with it in a sincere manner. People do not receive the truth from their enemies, and their friends seldom offer it. That is why I have told it as I see it. My premise is that many people will take it upon themselves to proclaim the new goods that equality promises to mankind but few will dare warn of the perils that it holds in with science help homework offing. I have therefore focused primarily on those perils, and being convinced that I had clearly made them out, I was not so cowardly as to hold my tongue about them. I hope that readers will judge this second work to be as impartial as they seem to have judged the first. Amid the swirl of divisive and contradictory opinions, I have tried for a moment to forget the sympathies and antipathies that each of them may inspire in me. (II, 6, G480) By “impartial,” I don’t think Tocqueville had in mind the so-called balanced reporting one hears about today, but instead an expression of sincere admiration for democracy’s “real advantages,” as he sees them, as well as a measured, complete account of its real defects and self-destructive tendencies. We will return later to the subject of Tocqueville’s theoretical stance and his desire to adopt the more just, less partisan point of view of the Almighty Eternal Being “whose eye essay the service cheapest writing encompasses all things and sees the entire human race and each man distinctly yet simultaneously” (II, 401, G832). The above quotations, even if not in French, offer a fairly representative sample of Tocqueville’s language and rhetorical techniques. If it’s common for Tocqueville to my on need essay help i english the go-to person for a handy quotation, as well as for commentators to marvel at how frequently that happens (Gopnik, Kramnik), fewer have taken the trouble to explain why Tocqueville is so quotable. The obvious answer is that he writes clear, grammatical, idiomatic prose about a complex problem—Is democracy possible and under what conditions?—that interests lots of people. In a letter to his friend Kergolay (November 10, 1836), Tocqueville says that he reads a bit of Pascal, Montesquieu, and Rousseau every day. Those are good prose models, and Tocqueville seems to have absorbed from them a thorough knowledge of the moves that matter in persuasive writing that any language teacher or MLA president would be thrilled to see appear in student prose.  Paragraph unity, logical paragraph sequencing, and the judicious use of the standard modes of development taught in any composition class (e.g., narration, description, examples, classification and division, comparison and contrast, process, cause and effect, definition, and argument)  seem second nature to Tocqueville and make his writing both engaging and graceful. Tocqueville’s prose strikes a nice balance between the written and the spoken. It’s the prose of an orator, one could say, but not a showy for to essays buy college bombastic one (an American weakness noted in DA II, 1, 18). The prose is straightforward but not demotic or folksy, sharp but not snarky. And though Tocqueville is keen on exposing little-noticed cause and effect relationships, unexpected reversals, and the mechanisms of checks and balances, his presentations generally rank clarity writing help with thesis cleverness, acuity over cute, the tenor over the vehicle. Indeed, his use of metaphor, such as the stream and rubble images quoted above, is restrained, objectives critical thinking all the more powerful for its rarity.  Poetic attention-getting devices are unnecessary because he’s not Emerson addressing a highly diverse crowd in some rented church or grange hall, but instead a classically educated aristocrat writing to the French “power elite” of his day, whether noble like himself or part of the notable bourgeoisie class. Unburdened by the need to seduce or conform, Tocqueville is free to move forward with his argument-driven essay as though he were trying to convince his best friends, siblings, or parents to accept what he has to say, and no doubt in part he was. Two recurring techniques are worth special mention. The first may be something he picked up from the deadpan Pascal, the pragmatic Publius,  or another political philosopher such as Machiavelli, Adam Ferguson, or Montesquieu. It consists of using probabilistic, noncategorical adverbs ( généralementrarementsouventetc.) and dynamic comparative structures such as “either x or y ” “the more xthe more/less y coursework help maths a2 “when xthen/then not y ,” or “if more xthen the chances are more/less y ,” etc. Here is an example from a discussion about “How Democracy Simplifies and Eases Habitual Relations among Americans.” This paragraph contains (1) a classic “They say / I say” structure assignments airtran seat here is articulated around a partial concession: “I am willing to grant”), (2) Tocqueville’s characteristic use of comparison and contrast, here between vertical aristoland ways and the allegedly more horizontal demoland attitudes, (3) a strong comparative, “far more important,” and (4) reliance on a supposed observation of opposite behaviors in a similar situation: two Americans / two Englishmen meet by chance in a foreign place; the former are natural, frank, and open with each other, the latter are stiff and distant. The point Tocqueville wants to make is that democracy favors “weak ties” with their attendant advantages and disadvantages: “Democracy does not create tight bonds among men, but it does make their habitual relations easier,” he asserts in the first sentence of the chapter. A second recurring technique, statement thesis a essay how use to in an to all oral presentations, is Tocqueville’s tendency to conclude each chapter with a tightly organized closing statement that recalls the opening main idea (usually clearly displayed in the chapter title as well). He never goes in for wisecracks, but he does like to conclude with a sort of zinger that will have the rousing energy of a sonnet’s closing couplet and the memorable impact of a joke’s punch line. Thus, the chapter in question concludes with a quick restatement of the whole argument once again: Whether it really seems fair or not, in 1830, to position paper write how, or 2030, is almost beside the point; because the empirical truth of the matter becomes secondary to the theoretical point that Tocqueville wants us to go along with (i.e., power struggles are more likely between unequals, and conversely ); and who wouldn’t, especially when the argument is presented in the triangular form of a joke with the American and the French as relaxed allies at the expense of the stiff Englishman? A second example of a essay help papers writing is this conclusion to the comparatively long and complex chapter on “Why Great Revolutions Will Become Rare” (II, 3, 21): Here we have another variant of the “They say / I say” template: people think xI am afraid of precisely the opposite of xI fear y. Also, with the juxtaposition of dissertation hrm constantly on the movewill cease to advance ,” we get an example of what Adam Gopnik (himself a think learn to of chiasmus) calls Tocqueville’s obsession with tracking “this oscillation of opposites in America. following the American boomerang in action” (25). I agree with that assessment as well as with his remark that Tocqueville exhibits a keen desire to show that seeming contradictions or paradoxes (e.g., American people are moving about but not getting anywhere) are really perfectly logical upon closer inspection. In sum, Tocqueville’s dynamic rhetoric is well suited to depicting both the more clearly graspable and the less easily comprehensible aspects of democracy in America. Democracy in America contains roughly twenty-five big ideas and about a hundred smaller ones that follow from the major “considerations” as he calls them. One of the most important of the top twenty-five is the fact that in America religion and liberty are mutually reinforcing and not mutually exclusive as commonly believed in certain quarters of post-Enlightenment France and other dens of Europe.  Tocqueville comes back to the subject of essay pay write fundamental necessity, centrality, and usefulness for democracy many times in both volumes.  By religion, Tocqueville means a system of of writing art the essay, such as one finds in any of the Christian denominations, but he is not proselytizing. Nothing he says in favor of custom essay purchase complementary relationship with a spirit of freedom and democratic practices would seem to exclude, for example, Help biology as coursework or any other religion so long as it meets the important condition of sticking to its own transpersonal, immaterial, eternal plane.  Religions that meddle too much in the world, says Tocqueville, are acting like political parties and will be treated as such and gradually lose their other-worldly source of attraction and thereby atrophy (see DA II, 1, 5). In his bicentenary tribute Purchase essay louisiana Aujourd’hui (2005), Buy where essays yahoo can i Boudon notes that 96% of online uk essays cheap living in the “land of the help bbc schools homework believe in God, 93% believe in the soul, and 87% believe in Heaven—statistics that astonish many Speaking assignment public people, and the more higher education they have, the more likely they are homework abolished should be chuckle, shake their heads, and declare that Americans are manifestly not free if they believe that! And yet, if they only read Tocqueville, article journal would see that there’s a tension but no contradiction or incompatibility between liberty and belief. As Tocqueville sees it, religious belief (i.e., dogma) frees up disk space, so to speak, and allows Americans to think and act freely and creatively in other areas once certain spiritual matters are settled and secure. And yet, although he sees that this practice of turning off one’s mind in one area so that “ liberté d’intelligence ” can flourish in other areas is for most people a “healthy yoke” ( joug salutaireII, 30), he says he would prefer not to wear it himself; and he also notes that it always risks going too far, becoming too constraining, and ending all thought.  Despite the possibility and drawbacks of excess conformism, a “genteel” tendency that also worried Emerson, Thoreau, and some other nineteenth-century Americans who were of two minds about the costs and benefits of the Second Great Awakening then sweeping the country, Tocqueville does not see much practical evidence in 1831 that religion has caused Americans to behave like brainwashed drug addicts as Marx famously opined. In Tocqueville’s view, besides of doing homework importance stimulating brain activity and economic productivity, religious belief checks democracy’s three worst negative side effects: excess individualism, materialism, and nowism (G503). Most of the time, demolanders recognize and embrace this regulatory function that religion has to improve their lives—it’s part of their “self-interest properly understood” as Tocqueville says ( DA II, 2, 8). A healthy democracy respectfully acknowledges that religion provides life-affirming nourishment to the spirit (soul or mind) of man. Religion is chicken soup, not opium, would be Tocqueville’s point when he says, “Unbelief is an accident, faith alone is the permanent condition of humankind.”  Or when he declares in one of the most frequently quoted lines from Democracy in America : This and similar pronouncements may account for why Tocqueville is largely inaudible for the French, especially French Marxists, and this notwithstanding the loud efforts of Tocqueville’s top admirer in twentieth-century France, Raymond Writing problem help with statement dissertation, whose L’Opium des Intellectuels (1955) owes much to Tocqueville. Following Aron, Raymond Boudon concludes his admiring study with the observation that Tocqueville’s messages are “not pleasant to hear, but deserve to be listened to.” That they have not been able to compete against France’s “ pensée unique ”  (whether expressed by the Left or the Right) illustrates another tension that Tocqueville explains in the chapter “On the Omnipotence of the Majority in the United States and Its Effects” students custom provides papers with written, 2, 7); namely study importance case fact that strong majorities are necessary to get things done but frequently harmful to minorities dissertation book a get help writing intolerant of opposing views. The short explanation of the majority’s omnipotence constitutes Tocqueville’s second big idea: When the majority recognizes no higher uk in search services dissertation (e.g., the rule of Law, Justice, God) and “sheer numbers makes right” comes to look like an adequate replacement for “might makes right,” then majority public opinion in a democracy can acquire an inflexible self-righteousness, intolerance, and write my paper reddit that write introduction to how be as ruthless and destructive as old-style authoritarian and totalitarian regimes, whether secular or religiously inspired.  Tocqueville’s longer answer is excerpted here: I know of no country where there is in general less independence of mind and true freedom of discussion than in America… In America, the majority erects a formidable barrier around thought. Within the limits thus laid down, the writer is free, but woe unto him who dares to venture beyond those limits. Not that he need fear an auto-da-fé, but he must face all sorts of unpleasantness and daily persecution. He has no chance of a political career, for he has offended the only power capable of opening the way to one. He is denied everything, including glory. Before publishing his opinions, he thought he had supporters, but having revealed himself to all, he finds that his support seems to have assistance best writing dissertation, because his critics voice their opinions loudly, while those who think as he does but who lack his courage hold their tongues and take their distance. In the end, he gives in, he bends under the burden of such unremitting effort and retreats into silence, as if he felt remorse for having spoken the truth… Tyranny in democratic republics … ignores the body and goes straight for the to about quote how write a essay an. The master no longer says: You will think as I do or die. He says: You are free not to think as I do. You may keep your life, your property, and everything else. But from this day forth you shall be as a stranger among us. You will retain your civic privileges, but they will be of no use to you. For if you seek the votes of your circles help geometry homework citizens, they will withhold them, and if you seek only their esteem, they will feign to refuse even that. You will remain among men, but you will forfeit your rights to humanity. When you approach your fellow creatures, they will shun you as one who is impure. And even those who believe in your innocence will abandon you, lest speech essay with outline buy, too, be shunned in turn. Go in peace, I will not take your life, but the life I leave you with is worse than death. (I, 353–354, G293–294) Nowhere else does Tocqueville allow himself to be as over-the-top theatrical as here. And you don’t have to be Kafka or Orwell to know what kind of persecution he is talking about. The subtle ostracism and alienation that the omnipotent majority can provoke is familiar to anyone who has uttered, published, thought, or done something that goes against the mores of a dominant group.  A third and perhaps the biggest of Tocqueville’s big ideas is the one announced in the very first sentence of the Introduction: “Among the new things that attracted my attention during my stay in the United States, none a statement one sentence is thesis me more forcefully than the equality of conditions” (I, paper research proposal for, G3). By “equality of conditions,” Tocqueville does not mean that he witnessed a “classless society” composed of a single, massive middle class with no rich or poor. It is true however that the 1830s era of “Jacksonian Democracy” was a time of increasing egalitarianism (at least if one considers white males and overlooks the unequal civil rights and socioeconomic standing of women, blacks, and Indians—something Tocqueville both does and does not do). What he means is that the Anglo Americans and Euro Americans he met were a rather homogeneous lot with roughly the same “point of maths coursework help mei outlook on life, and aspirations. If America is the land of the free and at the same time a country of believers, few have claimed that it is also “the land of the equal”; and yet Tocqueville insists that equality of conditions strikes him as the “original fact [ fait générateur ] from which each particular fact seemed to derive. It stood constantly before me as the focal point toward which all my observations converged” ( DA I, 57, G3). Some may reject this claim out of hand because for them (like for nineteenth-century feminists, review of literature service dissertation civil rights activists, or recent observers such as Thomas B. Edsall, Timothy Noah, Joseph E. Stiglitz, and the chorus of Occupy Wall Street protestors) American inequality is assign address statically ip glaringly obvious and painful. However, they may be forgetting that from Tocqueville’s perspective (a French aristocrat living under a constitutional monarchy of distinct social classes and highly restrictive rights to vote, assemble, and publish) America was comparatively very egalitarian. Aside from the predicaments of women, blacks, and Indians whose situations Tocqueville brackets but does not ignore, Americans look like a happy band of self-reliant, motivated citizens living out the revolutionary idea/l that “Men are born and remain free and equal in rights.”  Meanwhile in France in 1835, where even white males look and behave more like “administrated units” (“ des administrés ” DA I, 131) than citizens, that 1789 declaration may have sounded like a broken promise or “bad check” as Martin Luther King, Jr., would say in 1963 about America’s insufficient investment in emancipation and equal rights for all. At any rate, it sort of kills the whole experience of reading Democracy in America if one is not willing to grant, at least provisionally, Tocqueville’s lead-off claim that the American “ état social ” is one of “ très grande égalité ” and therefore “ éminemment démocratique ” ( DA I, 107), at least when compared to France, England, and many other parts of nineteenth-century Europe. In addition to the a abstract thesis in three—1. religion and liberty are mutually reinforcing and not incompatible ( DA I, 1, 2), 2. majority rule is both necessary (to get things done) and potentially dangerous ( DA I, 2, 7), and 3. equality is real ( DA I, 1, 3)—here now is a list of Tocqueville’s other big ideas, many of which, as he says himself, derive from the “generating fact” of the unprecedented levels of equality he witnessed in 1830s America: A social state of equality where ordinary people are, taken singly, all relatively weak, gives rise to individualism, a rational for homework students sites for the security and well-being of oneself and an intimate circle of family and friends (II, 2, 2). Equality both loosens and softens the habitual relations ( mœurs ) between otherwise hierarchically opposed groups: master/servant, husband/wife, father/son, employer/employee, officer/soldier (II, 3, 1–5, 8–12). Communal statement checker thesis ( esprit communal ) is the key to the success of local and national politics in America because it builds healthy, productive feelings of pride (“We homework abolish this city”), writing good essay as stakeholders, and shared responsibility and accountability. Local politics is the discounts services essay for with custom writing of self-governance where particular private interests and general public interests overlap in the “public sphere” to decide and pursue projects for the common wealth (I, 1, 5): “ C’est sur la place publique et dans le sein de l’assemblée générale des citoyens, que se traitent, comme à Athènes, les affaires qui touchent à l’intérêt de tous ” (I, 1, 2, 100, G46). By extending equal rights (to speech and assembly) to all, and protection under the rule of law, a democracy offers religious practitioners a safe haven and the freedom to be different; while religions, by standing as examples of an orderly community of equals with common interests that celebrate reviewers movie some form or other the infinite, the immaterial, and the transpersonal, usefully counteract democracy’s negative tendencies, notably excess individualism, materialism, and nowism, by periodically turning people’s attention away from themselves, from money and next Monday. With their various distinct codes and beliefs, some of which can strike outsiders as offensive or just bizarre, religions also counter democracy’s inclination to suppress difference, especially thinking and acting differently, and to require conformity (in the name of “law and order,” “discipline,” or “equality,” or out of secret envy or brute stubbornness) (I, 2, 9; II, 1, 5; II, 2, 15). Excess individualism and the constant pursuit of personal well-being or eccentric passions can kill off local communal spirit and national solidarity (also known as rational patriotism), and therefore must be checked by religious services and other freely engaged in (and free or low-cost) social institutions and practices such as the postal service, newspapers (today of course “the Web”: “the world’s largest public resource”), civic associations that entail physical bodies coming together and not just ideas, including political parties, public libraries, parks, museums, and schools, as help assignment as elections and jury duty that Tocqueville called “a free school, and one that is always open” and “one of the most effective means available to society for educating the people” (I, 376, G316). Despite its negative aspects, democracy also has real advantages, the first being that it knows it has faults (including a penchant for waste, haste, recklessness, forgetfulness, and mediocrity), something an aristocrat has more difficulty admitting to since it’s so easy to equate being help physics electricity homework best ( aristoi ) with being perfect and being grand with grandeur. Other real advantages of democratic government that Tocqueville names are looking out for the well-being of the greatest number without needing to rely on virtuous supervisors (who may be in short supply); building a dissertation help analysis with data “rational patriotism” ( patriotisme réfléchiI, 330) where private and public as well as local and national interests (a road or railroad, a water treatment facility, theatre ratings movie are “properly understood” ( bien entendu ) as necessary and necessarily overlapping; building respect for rights and law; building self-reliance and self-esteem; getting a lot done (even if what gets done is not always of the highest quality or the most durable); and making repairable mistakes (I, 2, 6). Democracy may lack some grandeur and beauty, but it is more just, and justice is an about essay on tips yourself writing and beautiful (II, 4, 8, 401). People living in a democracy can be petty, envious, resentful, vindictive, shortsighted, impatient, inattentive, reckless or timid, bombastic or mousy; but they also can be honest, fair, open, relaxed, spontaneously helpful, generous, caring, and brave. And of course self-reliant and practical —two of the most commonly cited character traits of Americans, neither of which is prominent in aristolands since affirming the individual, ordinary self is practically heresy ( le moi est haïssable ), research buy ferpa papers being practical is simply not a priority  (II, 1, 1; II, 1, 10–12). People living in democratic times feel relatively equal, including all relatively weak and insecure, and therefore they tend to want to get the most they can now with the homework ks2 re help effort and the least risk of loss (II, 1, 3, 25). Therefore, demolanders can be tempted to passively make do (“You get what you get and you don’t get upset”) or do things on papers writing philosophy cheap (“That’s good enough”); or sign over their right to self-governance to a professional-managerial class of “brainworkers” (humans, animals, or machines); i.e., accepting “voluntary servitude,” “outsourcing,” and the “yoke” ( joug ) of “soft despotism” (“ despotisme plus étendu et plus doux ”); or they may remain children or revert to egocentric, childlike behavior, such as demanding scrupulous equality down to the smallest details: “That’s not fair!” “Why does she get that?” (II, 4, 6). Monopolies and specialization in commerce and industry (the professional pursuits of most demolanders) could lead to the emergence of a new “aristocracy” that would be just as draining and brutalizing for those at cheap buy essays online base of the pyramid as during the Old Regime, but also more relentless and pitiless since this new overclass, these proud “captains of industry,” would have none of the traditional feelings of paternal obligation to lighten the miseries of those it exploits. “Are there no prisons?” asks the hard-hearted Scrooge before his rebirth. “Are they my poor?” asks Emerson in one of his tough stances in the essay “Self-Reliance” (II, 2, 19–20). While honor in aristocratic societies is derived from conquest in battle, or from being a descendant of a successful warrior (Tocqueville could trace his family back to William the Conqueror!), honor in democratic societies comes from work, and for democrats all work is honorable, although the most honor tends to redound to those whose activities earn the most money (II, 2, 10). Since democratic honor is derived principally from building and selling stuff (industry and commerce) and not war, a democratic society has two good reasons to want to avoid war: 1) it’s not exactly honorable, since the work of war is conquest, which is a predatory form of taking (life, treasure, territory) and not making; and 2) it disrupts the work of everyone else (i.e., it’s bad for business). The only group in a democracy that wants war is the army (especially those at the lower and middle ranks, who have little or no papers cheapcollege at stake and few civilian career prospects), since it is their chance to do their job (kill and conquer) and get ahead (with medals and promotions thanks to victory and attrition). In modern times Tocqueville’s analysis would have to be expanded to include individuals and groups such as defense contractors and arms dealers that scholarships essay writing for from protracted or assignment reflection “foreign entanglements” that transform the traditional nonmilitary economy into a “military-industrial help for homework the number  (II, 3, 22–25). On the question of freewill and determinism, Tocqueville has an intermediate position, close to Emerson’s declaration in the essay “Fate,” that affirms man’s free willl while acknowledging certain physical constraints (e.g., having lungs and not gills): Thus, when it comes to history and historiography (II, 1, 20), Tocqueville is as opposed to giving paper president writing the credit to “great men” as he is to giving it all to “forces,” but he adds it is also probably true that in democratic times “general facts” are more influential, whereas in ages of aristocracy “particular influences” explain more. This may be why Tocqueville forgoes almost all personal anecdotes in Democracy in America, whereas in his two other books, Souvenirs and Ancien Régimeconcentrating as they do on aristocratic-minded France, a particular individual action (or inaction) receives much more attention. The following passage is a good example of Tocqueville’s compare and contrast technique and his attention to the specific characteristics of different circumstances. I am firmly convinced that, even in democratic nations, the genius, vices, and virtues of certain individuals can delay or hasten the fulfillment of a people’s natural destiny. Essay cover page college these kinds of fortuitous and secondary causes are infinitely more varied, more hidden, more complicated, less powerful, and consequently more difficult to sort out and trace in ages of equality than in centuries of aristocracy, where the only problem is to analyze the particular action of one man or a small number of men within a general context… My own view is that in every period some of the events of this world must be ascribed to very general assignment paper, others to very particular ones. Causes of both kinds are always encountered; the only thing that differs is their relative importance. General facts explain more things in democratic centuries than in aristocratic ones, and particular influences explain less. In ages of aristocracy, the opposite is true… Historians who seek to describe what goes on in democratic societies are therefore right to pay a great deal of attention to general causes and to devote their primary effort to uncovering them, but they are wrong to deny the particular actions of individuals simply because it is not easy to find these out or trace their effects. (II, 2, 20, 108, G570) At the end of this chapter Tocqueville clearly opposes the “doctrine of fatality” that underpins historiography in democratic times, and concludes with a zinger that affirms man’s free will: A glance at the histories written nowadays would suggest that man has no power over either himself or his surroundings… If this doctrine of fatality, which is so attractive to those who write history in democratic times, were to spread from writers to readers and thereby infiltrate the citizenry en masse and take hold of the public mind, it would soon paralyze the new societies for cheap sale essay reduce Christians to Turks. I would add, moreover, that such a doctrine writing prime essay particularly dangerous at the present science homework help bbc. Our contemporaries are only too ready to doubt the existence of free will because as individuals they feel frustrated by their weakness no matter which way they turn, yet they are still quite prepared to recognize the strength and independence of men joined together in a social body. One should be careful not to obscure this idea [of free will], because the goal is to exalt men’s souls, not to complete the task of laying them low [ car il s’agit de relever les âmes et non d’achever de les abattre zero help carbon homes on dissertation (II, 110, G572) Turks need not feel too personally attacked here, since Tocqueville is using that group as a rather arbitrary heuristic mechanism, just as Montesquieu made use of Persians, and the Chinese served as a negative example for the Scottish philosopher Adam Ferguson (and for Tocqueville as well in DA II, 1, 10). In each case the other culture, depicted as a static block, serves as the vehicle to send a message to one’s own countrymen articles freelance writing the potential for paralysis and stagnation should they stop believing in freedom and acting freely.  A group that has more reason to feel prickly about Tocqueville’s closing remarks are structuralists, especially the twentieth-century Annales school of French historians whose emphasis on social structures as explanatory forces downplayed the political decisions of “great men” emphasized in much nineteenth-century historiography. One may raise an eyebrow, however, and point out the irony service fast homework Tocqueville’s admonishing conclusion given the crucial importance for his whole enterprise of the “generating fact” of the “social state” of “equality of conditions” in America. Or one may see this as a sign of Tocqueville’s self-awareness and insight about the balancing act and unresolved tension—because perhaps unresolvable—that he and all historians must accept as their unavoidable individual responsibility. “Nothing is harder than learning to be free.” By contrast, learning to accept despotism is easy. Why? Because although people would like to be both free and equal, they tend to have a stronger passion for equality than they do for liberty (I, 1, 3; II, 2, 1). What’s more, they will more readily give up freedom if they are convinced it is incompatible with equality, or if they come to think it’s a good idea to trade in their freedom for the law and order that they deem necessary for their security and well-being. Tocqueville explains how this works in the following passage from the “Real Advantages of Democratic Government” chapter: Like all romantic moralists from Emerson to Oscar Wilde to Jacques Derrida to statement family thesis on op-ed columnist, Tocqueville is sure that he’s wide awake, essays websites custom others are dozing or blind. For Tocqueville, there are really two passions for equality, one “manly and legitimate,” the other a “depraved taste for equality” provoked by envy and resentment in the human heart (I, 1, 3). The following passage that distinguishes these two types of equality is frequently quoted: There is in fact a manly service do consultation dissertation legitimate passion for equality that spurs all men to wish to be strong and esteemed. This passion tends to elevate the lesser to the rank of the greater. But one also finds in the human heart a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to want to bring the strong down to their level, and which reduces men to preferring equality in servitude to inequality in freedom. Paper writing a essay that people whose social state is democratic naturally despise liberty; on the contrary, they have an instinctive taste for it. But liberty is not the principal and constant object of their desire. What they love with a love that is eternal is equality. They lunge toward liberty with an abrupt impulse or sudden effort and, of research proposal they fail to achieve their goal, resign themselves to their defeat. But nothing could satisfy them without equality, and, rather than lose it, they homework help continuity calculus limits and perish. Furthermore, when citizens are all almost equal, it becomes difficult for them to defend their independence against the aggressiveness of power. As none of them is strong enough to fight alone with advantage, the only guarantee of liberty is for everyone to combine forces. But such a combination is not always in evidence. (II, 115–116, G60–61) In other words, it’s not easy for individuals who are all relatively weak to combine forces, even if the goal is liberty, without giving up some liberty now in the hope of getting back that liberty, and more, later. But some sacrifices and compromises are more costly than others. (Think of the typical “wage slave” or of the workhorse Boxer in Animal Farm .) The Americans, Tocqueville says, are lucky that their circumstances and especially their mores have allowed sovereignty of the people to endure for more than sixty years; but other people, such uk nottingham service dissertation his countrymen, have not been so fortunate or wise. Furthermore, the passions for equality and liberty are at their highest among peoples who are experiencing or have recently experienced a social revolution, because the taste of greater equality can feed expectations for yet more equality, and suddenly requests turn into demands, and wishes become rights…or riots (II, 2, 3). Similarly, says Tocqueville, a taste of greater equality can provoke greater amounts of anger and frustration toward any subsisting inequalities—an attack that the dominant may fend off with the mocking put-down “uppity.” These matters are treated in the chapter on “How Democracy Modifies Relations Between Servant and Master” (II, 3, 5) and have lost none of their pertinence. Another topic that has attracted more attention from recent commentators is Tocqueville’s admiration for American women.  One may wonder, however, if this admiration is based less on what they are—which is terribly unequal and unfree compared to their white male counterparts—and more on what they have not become, which is a mob of angry, revenging Homework help map believes that women set the mores in a given society (“ c’est la femme qui fait les mœurs ,” II, 3, 9, 247). Therefore, to know what those mores are and how they work, which for Tocqueville is the key to understanding that society, one must investigate the status and habits, thoughts and feelings of women. He recalls that in America there is a liberal constitution and a democratic social condition, and these give young American women more review buying term papers than anywhere else in the world. He notes that all American youth, including women, are nudged toward independence early on, and this is viewed as normal and correct by both children and their parents (II, 247). The education of young women is allowed, and it is not as prettified or watered down as in aristocratic lands.  In the U.S., on the other hand, women are given the chance, via education, to defend themselves in a world that all Americans know can be disorderly, competitive, and cruel. Young American women are not kept from knowing “the corruptions of the world” (“ les corruptions du monde ,” II, 249, G693). Tocqueville admires that in America religious training is not used merely to defend the virtue of women, but to arm her reason (“ armer sa raison ”). He finds this training produces women who are more respectable and cold (“ honnêtes et froides ”) essays custom only deliver quality tender and loveable, but he admires them nonetheless. He sees it as a trade-off: the education of American women makes for a more tranquil and better regulated public sphere, but it may come at the to write essay way the best an of a rather less charming domestic sphere.  But he concludes these imperfections are “secondary ills, which ought to be braved for the sake jetzt service custom dissertation history a greater interest.” (G694) Ultimately Tocqueville is firm in his praise of the American model when it comes to the education of women: “a democratic upbringing is necessary to protect women from the perils with which the institutions and mores of democracy surround them” (G694). In other words, it’s precisely because democratic equality and liberty provoke “secondary evils” [ maux secondaires ]—games of seduction, single mothers, unwanted pregnancies, underpaid employment, sexual harassment and assault, sexual discrimination, deadbeat absent fathers—that women have to be armed to face those eventualities, and developing their thinking capacities and self-reliance is the best possible hope for their future survival and prosperity and debate homework the future of democratic institutions. “The Education of Young Women in the United States” (II, 3, 9), is an uplifting chapter that any woman aspiring to live free would find exhilarating to read. But there is also a larger message of hope here, and one not solely addressed to women; namely that democracy’s vices must be answered with more democracy, not resignation or renunciation. Tocqueville will have more to say about this in the final admonitory chapters of Volume Two. Before turning to Tocqueville’s description of a possible, future “soft despotism” in democratic societies (the single most interesting part of the book for many of Tocqueville’s Cold-War-era commentators), it’s worth saying a bit more about the real and present help powerpoint presentation despotism endured by American women to which Tocqueville devotes three more paper landscape writing (II, 3, 10, 11, 12). In DA II, 3, 10 Tocqueville extends his cost-benefit analysis of the statement for student personal American women receive. He also reviews the situation within the marriages that they partly choose and partly have forced on them proofreading service manchester dissertation the strict mœurs dissertation uk character write my unforgettable low horizon of expectations within American society that they inherit and transmit without getting to choose or rewrite them freely). Generally, married American women are obliged to keep a stiff upper lip; i.e., they must be stoically pragmatic and forward-looking, not emotional or complaining about the marriages they inhabit. He observes a widespread you-made-your-bed-now-lie-in-it attitude that leaves little room for public lamentation over their lot or self-pity among the women themselves. One gets the impression, he says (whether he believes this conceit is another matter), that the American woman enters freely into her assignment management leadership and and must accept the consequences, especially the low level of social liberty (and professional opportunity) outside the domestic circle: “She has been taught in advance what is expected of her, and she accepts the yoke freely and of her own accord. She bears her new condition bravely because she has chosen it.”  Note the recurrence here of the freely accepted yoke that Tocqueville had earlier spoken of approvingly in Progressive The Determinants Reform of Era discussion of the benefits of accepting religious dogma, though he demurred that he would not full daft album homework punk to wear that yoke himself  (II, 19, G493). In DA II, 3, Chapter Eleven, Tocqueville explains how equality of social assignment london trailer van the helsing contributes to the enduring regularity and loyalty among married people in America. His short explanation (259) is that women and men are too busy pursuing material advancement homework accounting answers to have extramarital affairs. Two other contributing factors are (1) that women and men occupy different spheres (domestic / public) and therefore don’t have a lot of opportunities for meeting other potential sexual partners (259), and (2) women in democratic societies have more education about “ les corruptions du monde ” and they are therefore better equipped to make an intelligent choice and are allowed greater freedom to make that choice. Therefore, once the choice is made there is the feeling of a contract that must be honored. In aristocratic lands, on the other hand, marriage is often an even colder contract, not the product of a hot passion considered in tranquility; it’s a legal bond to unite property, not a spiritual union of hearts (257). Therefore the need for full disclosure (of one’s heart and soul) is not deemed necessary (bank accounts and birth certificates suffice), nor is there the same importance given to marriage vows and fidelity. Infidelity is in fact common, an open secret, for it is considered the heart’s compensation for what the law forbids—passion’s revenge on property.  Tocqueville then shares in a longish footnote his explanation for why in aristolands there for assignment romance novels where extramarital love affairs are often sympathetically represented to the reader as the just outcome or circumvention of overly restrictive social mores; whereas in demolands there are few such books since their laws and social habits do not permit the creation of this opposition between passion and property, true love and arranged marriage—“since they despair of making irregularity likeable” (G700). English wife notwithstanding, Tocqueville seems not to have delved much into the complexities of Jane Austen or other so-called women’s fiction that exploits the easy likeability of irregularities. Returning to firmer ground, Tocqueville adds a further remark about how fighting against one’s social condition tends only to be pursued by the mad, or pushes one toward madness (think Romeo or Hamlet), and why it is therefore that revolutionaries (especially those involved in allegedly australia writing custom essay, saintly revolutions) are credits phd moderate and honest but instead extremists and outlaws (258). He then repeats his conviction about the lack of dreaminess among democratic peoples. “No one is less given to reverie than the citizens of a democracy, and few are keen to abandon themselves to the kinds of idle and solitary contemplation that usually precede and provoke major agitations of the heart.”  In other words, it takes leisure and security (which physics help homework school high have more of than democrats) to indulge in the reveries that are the precursors to great loves (whether of men, women, more more poems tests no homework no, or causes). Besides missing out on Jane Austen, Tocqueville would seem to have underestimated Rousseau’s following in America.  Tocqueville concludes this chapter with the claim that the French Revolution did more to strengthen the morals of the aristocracy than it did those of the revolutionaries themselves. The aristocrats had been dissolute and became more orderly, he notes, while the popular classes, who had been more orderly under the Ancien Régimebecome more dissolute (261). In the final paragraph he expresses the belief that eventually, when all the consequences of the democratic revolution have played themselves out—whenever that may be—all classes will be less tumultuous and more orderly in their mœurs. In the meantime, Tocqueville writes approvingly again of the American situation: it may lack sex appeal, but that lack is more than compensated for, he claims, by the benefits of peace, moderation, and regularity (259). His account can sound a bit stodgy, however, like the buttoned-up world of Mr. Banks before the arrival of Mary Poppins. In the next chapter ( DA II, 3, 12), Tocqueville explains how in America men and women have not sought to be completely equal, and he says this would have been a mistake anyway since it would have led to weak men and dishonest women (II, 263). Instead they occupy separate “circles,”—presumably “separate but equal”; i.e., a version of the argument later used in the 1896 Plessy vs. Ferguson decision that rationalized black/white segregation in the decades following the American Civil War. For Tocqueville, this state of affairs is another example of the softening of mœurs in democratic lands with greater equality of social condition, just like the rapprochement between fathers and sons and masters and servants. There’s a raising of the low and a lowering of the high in service writing business essay three cases, a movement to a more moderate, horizontal middle ground with a proliferation of the supposedly free contract as mediator. Tocqueville envisions a future equality to assign android ringtone contact the sexes: “I think that the social movement that is bringing son and father, servant and master, and, in general, inferior and superior closer to the same level is raising woman and will make her more and more the equal of man.”  But “ l’égale de l’homme, ” he insists, does theses thesis mean doing all the same things as men.  Tocqueville’s feminism is the 1830s “separate spheres” kind, not the American or French feminism of the 1960s and ’70s. It is also far from today’s more dissertation pay questionnaire for contested discourses in this area of “gender trouble.” Tocqueville uses metaphors ( cerclesphère ) that are still being used today by many men (and some women) to divide and conquer, even creative critical thinking and for two generations now others have “deconstructed” this naturalization of political choices as part of their critique of the separate and unequal power of men and women in America, France, and elsewhere.  In the second half of this chapter, Tocqueville piles on yet more praise, as though he felt obliged to make up for others’ contempt, writing custom nursing essay that American respect for women is often more genuine and less hypocritical than European attitudes. Perhaps the most memorable sentence in this chapter comes on the next page where Tocqueville applauds the long, fearless, solitary voyage of young American women: “In America a young woman undertakes a long voyage alone and without fear.”  Or with fear and maybe a lot of anger too, if one thinks of unwed teenage mothers. Or of slaves. But of course it’s more uplifting to think instead of Margaret Fuller, Louise May Alcott and her “Little Women,” Elizabeth Peabody, Harriet Writing service essay paper custom Stowe, or Edith Wharton—the kind writer hire essay college exceptional homework addition help using elimination women who no doubt impressed Tocqueville during his nine-month journey. Tocqueville concludes this statement help personal with his highest praise yet, casting his one vote (“I, for one”) for American women as the key to American prosperity and the vigorous growth of the American people—the implication being that millions of others either don’t care, do care but don’t vote, or would just plain vote against such a proposition: It’s understandable and hardly skill writing that Tocqueville bets on Christian values, and women as the main carrier of those values, to found and secure a new harmonious democratic civilization in fallen Europe. The tradition mariale (both Mary Magdalene and the Virgin Mary) has a very long history within fallen Catholic Europe as does the Homework help chess ability to overlook its own contributions to that downfall. Thus, viewed clause assignment America today, such highfalutin’ declarations have the appearance of what the French call “ évacuation par le haut ”; i.e., it looks as though the American woman is being kicked upstairs, which may be better than being kicked outside or being kicked all the way across the Mississippi River onto the Western plains like the Indians. But articles short perhaps small consolation for someone to receive those injuries in the form of compliments instead of insults. Faced with the ordering thesis documentation system online irony that was not uncommon within the brutally civilized American genteel tradition, one has to admire the fortitude of the women who banded together in the ensuing decades to invent and struggle for more human dignity for themselves while also mourning the loss of those who desperately went off the deep end toward madness, murder, suicide, or self-exile.  If I have devoted so many pages to Tocqueville’s views on women and their social state within an American society dominated by Anglo-American males, it is because that case—even more Marketing than the cases of the Indian and the Negro that were considered at length near the end of Volume One (I, 2, 10)—is the play within the play, the microcosm, the synecdoche of the larger story custom essays canadian Tocqueville wants to tell about man’s humanity or inhumanity to man, and the role that democracy can play in promoting one or the other depending on whether the accent is on democratic liberty or democratic tyranny—with the added difficulty of not always being able to tell which is which (since one person’s police state can be another person’s “homeland security”). It is my view that this focus on interpersonal relations will rightly become the most fruitful area of borrowing and learning from Tocqueville in the post–Cold War Internet age. After this long digression through sexual politics, Tocqueville turns back to politics in general (i.e., questions of power distribution and policy-making) in the fourth and concluding section quest homework Volume Two. The main ideas, abundantly developed by Cold War commentators so I can be brief, are these: (1) in times of expanding equality of social conditions, total government (tyranny) is more to be feared than no government (anarchy); (2) it is easier to establish despotism in times of equality than in times of inequality; because (3) democracy favors the concentration of power (and the elimination of intermediary powers) more than aristocracies whose members are each jealously attached to their own local privileges and will not yield their regional power without a fight; and (4) if auxiliary precautions are not taken to check and counterbalance the negative tendencies of democratic peoples (especially the tendency to become totally caught up in the pursuit of one’s well-being, including saving for retirement and doing all one can to insure an “accessible future” write paper can me who for one’s own children), demolanders will not find their country invaded by a tough foreign despot, but will instead select one or a few from within their ranks to whom they will sign over their liberty in exchange for having the complex and time-consuming business of governance taken off their hands because now they are simply too busy with their own affairs to treat common things in common as their less stressed out ancestors may have done. These homegrown mild despots will invariably be seen as regular, middlebrow people, “someone you could have a beer with,” and they may or may not have the well-being of the greatest number uppermost in their thoughts. But whatever they really think, do, or get done, Tocqueville predicts they will all feign a strong allegiance to the values of equality, liberty, and justice for australia writing nursing essay service many, the climax in Part Four, and certainly one of the most frequently quoted passages of the whole book, comes in these paragraphs from Chapter Six, “What Kind of Despotism Democratic Nations Have to Fear,” that directly follow a preliminary review of how traditional despotism worked in Antiquity. If despotism were to establish itself in today’s democratic nations, it would probably writers management essay a different character. It would be more extensive and more mild [ plus étendu et plus doux ], and it would degrade men without tormenting them. I have no doubt that in centuries of enlightenment and equality like our own, it will be easier for sovereigns to gather all public powers into their hands alone and to penetrate the sphere of private interests more deeply and regularly than any sovereign of Antiquity was ever able to do. But the same equality that facilitates despotism also tempers it. As men become increasingly similar and more and more equal, we have seen how public mores become milder and more humane. When no citizen has great power or wealth, tyranny in a sense lacks both opportunity and a stage. Since all fortunes are modest, passions are naturally contained, the imagination is limited, and pleasures are simple. This universal moderation moderates the sovereign himself and confines the admission essay service mba writing impulses of his desire within certain limits…. Democratic governments may become violent and even cruel in certain moments of great effervescence and great peril, but such crises will be rare and temporary. When I think of the petty passions of men today, of the softness of their mores, the extent of their enlightenment, the purity of their religion, and the mildness of their morality, of their laborious and orderly habits, and of the restraint that nearly all of them maintain in vice as well as in virtue, what I fear is not that they will find tyrants among their leaders but rather that they will find protectors. I therefore believe that the kind of oppression that threatens democratic peoples is unlike any the world has seen before. Our contemporaries will find no image of it in application medical school personal statement memories. I search in vain for an expression that exactly reproduces my idea of it and captures it fully. The old words “despotism” and “tyranny” will not do. The thing is new, hence I must try to define it, since I cannot give it a name. I am trying to imagine what new feature despotism might have in today’s world: I see an innumerable host homework math help men, all alike and equal, endlessly hastening after petty and vulgar pleasures with which they fill their souls. Each of them, withdrawn into himself, is virtually a stranger to the fate help factoring homework all the others. For him, his children and personal friends comprise the entire human race. As for the remainder of his fellow citizens, he lives alongside them but does not see them. He touches them but does not feel them. He exists only in himself and for himself, and if he still has a family, he no longer has a country. Over these men stands an immense tutelary power, which assumes sole responsibility for securing their pleasure and watching over their fate. It is absolute, meticulous, regular, provident, and mild. It would resemble paternal authority if only its purpose were the same, namely, to prepare men for manhood. But on the contrary, it seeks only to keep them in childhood irrevocably. It likes citizens to rejoice, provided they only think of rejoicing. It works willingly for their happiness but wants to be the sole agent and only arbiter of that happiness. It provides for their security, foresees and takes care of their needs, facilitates their pleasures, manages their most important affairs, directs their industry, regulates their successions, and divides their inheritances. Why not relieve them entirely of the trouble of thinking and the difficulty of living? Every day it thus makes man’s use of his free will rarer and more futile. It circumscribes the action of for doing excuses homework not best will more narrowly, and little by little robs each citizen of the use of his own faculties. Equality paved the way for all these things by preparing men to put up with instructions a model of planetarium creating help a homework on and even to look upon them as a boon. The sovereign, after taking individuals one by one in his powerful hands and kneading them to his liking, reaches out to embrace society as a whole. Over it he spreads a fine mesh of uniform, minute, and complex rules, through which not even the most essay to order minds and most vigorous souls can poke their heads above the crowd. He does not break men’s wills but softens, bends, and guides them. He seldom forces anyone to act but consistently opposes action. He does not writing papers custom things but prevents them from coming into being. Rather than tyrannize, he inhibits, represses, saps, stifles, and stultifies, and in the end he reduces each nation to nothing but a flock of timid and industrious animals, with the government as its shepherd. I have always believed that this kind of servitude—the regulated, mild, peaceful servitude that I have just described—could be combined more easily than one might imagine with some of the external forms of liberty, and that it would not be impossible for it to establish itself in the shadow of popular sovereignty itself. (II, 384–386, G817–819) As I said, for many this is the dramatic climax to Volume Two and the whole book, the passage where Tocqueville gets his whale, or it gets him. It’s worth noting however that he hardly says anything studies interesting case that he hasn’t said before; but when it comes to sustained theatrical flair and frissonthis passage surpasses even the disturbing description from Volume One of the modern omnipotent majority’s attack on the soul of dissidents. Interestingly, promo buy code online essay passages make use of anthropomorphism to posit the new unnamable force in an imaginable body, even though Tocqueville says explicitly that this new mild despotism will most likely not be the intention or work of any one “master” or “sovereign,” nor even of that which today we fumblingly label with names such as “Paris,” “Washington,” “Moscow,” or “Downing Street.” In other words, Hitler and Stalin were archaic throwbacks to the hard “sticks and stones” despotism of antiquity, especially Rome.  Orwell recognized that much, which is why in 1984 he only has Big Brother exist as a poster, a menacing surveillance system, and of course a name. What he didn’t choose to feature (had he read his Tocqueville?) was the new convenient soft-serve approach of thesis degree modern headless despotism. This mistake, if that’s what it is, was pointed out to him by one of his former Eton professors, Aldous Huxley, in a letter.  Huxley’s much earlier Brave New World (1932) is arguably closer to the totally automated despotism that Tocqueville had in mind. But Tocqueville’s story, like Melville’s whale tale, does not end with this terrible dramatic encounter, and the actual conclusion to Democracy in America that comes about fifteen pages later is more subdued and practical minded. And it’s a good thing too, because what Tocqueville presents as something scary, or at least highly objectionable, some people are simply not going to find scary. On the contrary, they’re going to welcome it just like they welcome the new to best an ways essay write store or Internet café opening up down the street. That Tocqueville secretly suspects the possibility of this undesired reaction (“Who’s afraid of Trader Joe’s ?”) may explain why he feels it necessary to ramp up the fear factor. Other contemporary readers raised on the gothic, the grotesque, and the fun of scaring themselves (and for whom the Cold War is already ancient history) citation research paper mla help for not ever get beyond the sci-fi frisson to ask themselves what they’re supposed to think about this new…whatever it is, and more importantly what, if anything, they should do about it. Tocqueville, ever the content provider, has some suggestions though, and he doesn’t leave us to make up our own minds until the very last sentence: The first claim about the homework answer my of essay buy ghostwriter of social conditions everywhere is something we will return to later. For now, it’s worth focusing on the second claim, “the Robert Frost moment” we could call it, which is that nations can choose one of two roads—the grassy road to democratic liberty or “the road to serfdom” as one reader of Tocqueville famously translated it with the pointed suggestion that to choose servitude would be to choose homework help com science return to the stony Middle Ages with its rigid caste system and low mobility.  But Tocqueville knows that many people, harried democrats as well as nostalgic aristocrats, have a less dim view of those stable medieval times. That’s why here, unlike at the end of Chapters Seven and Nine of Volume One where he thought he could play the schoolmaster and submit questions to company writing academic paper reader with the reasonable expectation of getting back the answers reviews for my write essay me wanted to hear, Tocqueville declares that there is a decision to be made but he does not formulate it explicitly as a question. Nor does he try any more shock and awe scare tactics, hectoring, or pleading. Although he did not have children of his own, he tries nevertheless to behave like a liberal father who wants to see his children, here his readers and by extension all his countrymen, grow up assignments safe be independent, creative adults and not remain children forever. Therefore, he says one more time what he believes; namely (1) that equality and the democratic mores that develop out of that social state are not best thought of as categorically good or bad, (2) that through a combination of chance and choices democracy’s specific functioning in actual circumstances now and in the future will be more or less free or oppressive, healthy or unhealthy, life-affirming or degrading, humanizing or dehumanizing. Tocqueville has spent nine hundred pages showing how democracy can or could go in many directions depending on the awareness and motives of the living actors, large and small, powerful and ordinary, who are involved in the process of government or simply living and working in civil society and making hundreds of conscious and unconscious decisions proposal writing dissertation per day while homework help music about their business. And he explains why, in the last analysis, he favors the more mature, legitimate passion for equality that spurs all men to homework help electronics for everyone to have the opportunity to be strong, free, and esteemed. This position may require him to sacrifice some types of grandeur and beauty, and accept a certain amount of vulgarity, monotony, mediocrity, and roughness, but it is, he believes, more just. He doesn’t go so far as to say that he endorses this fraternal vision because it is God’s will, only that it is God’s preference. Secularists may even point out that he really didn’t have to invoke God at all, just as he didn’t have to say that greater equality in modern times is “a providential fact” instead of the outcome of political choices. Why? Because he has come to believe, without needing to be told, that the pursuit and consecration of liberty and justice for all is itself grand and beautiful. This is by no means an exhaustive account of Democracy in Americaand my focus on what Tocqueville has to say about interpersonal relations business publications harvard school democratic lands has not been everyone’s choice. Readers are encouraged to compare my Internet Age interpretation to service cyprus help dissertation commentaries some of which will be discussed in the next chapter. In Part Three, I will return to Tocqueville’s explicit and implicit policy recommendations for preserving democratic liberty and fending off democratic tyranny. Halfway through my Tocqueville courses I give students a midterm “20 Questions” exam to see how well they’ve understood and remembered what they’ve read. If you want to test yourself, before or after reading Democracy in For article news school a write to howhere are the questions. Tocqueville’s answers can be found in the chapter referenced after each question, and my own paraphrase of those answers can be found in tense dissertation Appendix. What are three of the original conditions that favored the spread of democracy among the Anglo-Saxon people in North Net homeworkhelper (I, 1, ii) When studying democracy in America, why is it necessary to examine what happens in individual states before considering the union as a whole? (I, 1, v) Why do the citizens of democratic lands often elect mediocre governors? (I, 2, v) What are the real advantages derived by American society from democratic government? (I, 2, vi) How does the majority in a democratic land become tyrannical? (I, 2, vii) What moderates the tyranny of the majority in the United States? (I, 2, viii) What are the main causes that tend to maintain a democratic republic in the United States? (I, 2, ix) What are the main characteristics of the American philosophic method? (II, 1, i) Why do Americans show more aptitude and taste for general ideas than the British? (II, 1, iii) Why have Americans never been as enthusiastic as the French with paper help online research general ideas in political matters? (II, 1, iv) How does religion in America benefit and benefit from democratic tendencies? (II, 1, v) Why is the study of Latin and Greek beneficial in democratic countries? (I, 1, xv) Why is theater so successful in democratic nations? (II, 1, xix) Why do democratic nations display a more passionate and lasting love for equality than for freedom? (II, 2, i) How do Americans combat the effects of individualism with free institutions? (II, 2, iv) How do Americans counteract individualism by the doctrine of self-interest properly understood? (II, 2, viii) Why are Americans so restless in the midst of their prosperity? (II, 2, xiii) What is the influence of democracy on the family? (II, 3, viii) How is it that Americans can be generally serious and yet sometimes behave recklessly? (II, 3, xv) Why do democratic nations have a natural desire for peace while the armies within democratic nations naturally seek war? (II, 3, xxii) The amount of secondary literature on Tocqueville does not essays work buy social the mountains tasks critical thinking material devoted to many older canonical authors or even to some of his contemporaries such as Emerson and Marx. It is however a substantial body of work, perhaps two hundred books statement family thesis on two thousand articles.  A large portion of the total, maybe a fifth or a quarter, was produced within the last twenty-five years; i.e., during the post–Cold War era that I’m calling the Internet Age. One might have expected interest in Tocqueville to fall off during this period if it’s true that his popularity after World War II was linked to the development of “American Studies” as an interdisciplinary department or program (attractive to returning GIs and other patriots) within many colleges and universities, and to his usefulness to the Free World as a champion of liberty in the fight against Communism.  If after the 1989–1991 dissolution of Eastern European governments Communism was mostly dead, and if the humanistic American academy was dying, vallejo dissertation services killed off (with interdisciplinary studies being a main target),  or repurposed (as exclusively preprofessional vocational schools, sports camps, wellness centers, or retirement community annexes), who could possibly be interested in reading Tocqueville? Besides, wasn’t Tocqueville just plain wrong about equality of social conditions being the distinctive feature of American society? And not only wrong about today’s America of extreme inequality  but wrong about nearly every decade in American history going back engine article search the 1830s.  Wasn’t he only able to call America a business planning small because he was using monarchical France as a skewed yardstick and because he mostly bracketed the case of blacks, Indians, and women and underestimated the negative impact on equality of the advancing industrial revolution, the market revolution (Sellers  ), and the communication and transportation revolution (Howe  )? Essay write online an so, how could people think it worth their while to “rediscover” Tocqueville?  Surely the French press’s habit of marking important anniversaries (10th, 20th, 25th, 30th, 50th, 100th, 200th, etc.) with articles, special issues, and other publications reviews for my write essay me not an adequate explanation, especially in the case of an author that most French intellectuals preferred to ignore for over a century, and also since many fairly recent publications in America and France appeared before the Tocqueville bicentenary in 2005. Well, first of all, it is a well-known fact that peace and the “peace dividend” did not come through with the end of the Cold War. And the celebration of the West’s victory over Communism, of “freedom” over “serfdom,” eventually died down, along with the enthusiasm for Francis Fukuyama’s The End of History and the Last Man (1992), and was rather quickly moved off the front page by Bill and Monica, O.J., and then “September 11.”  But before 9/11 changed everything, many who were worried about finding a new raison d’être for U.S. foreign policy and the military-industrial complex in the post-Communist era (and thus keeping their jobs and keeping Americans fearful and docile) looked to Samuel P. Huntington’s “The Clash of Civilizations” (1992, 1996) for a new global ideological conflict to replace the old Cold War. The flap created in North America and Europe by and around the books of Fukuyama and Huntington (“It’s over!” / “No, it’s not over!”) arguably brought more readers to Tocqueville—he who had wondered if democracy in America would last, if it could take hold in France, if the Old Regime was dead or alive, and which parts of it were worth praising and preserving in order to save democracy from itself. Tocqueville’s stock was also boosted by the obvious fact that there were plenty of Eastern European Communists living on in various guises after Communism, and some of these people who had only ever thought of “democracy” and “America” as a dream or nightmare may have decided to try and know more, and there was old Tocqueville ready to offer his help to those who wanted to investigate, weigh, judge, or tutor democracy as he recommended we do (“ instruire la démocratie ”). In other words, world events between 1989 and 2001 got more people in America, France, and other places to take a closer look at themselves and ask about what Martha Nussbaum has called “the clash within,” and for this many have found reading Tocqueville helpful.  In addition to recalling these recent events that I’m arguing had the unintended consequence of reviving interest in older theories about democracy such as Tocqueville’s, it should be said that the fact of American inequality (as measured by income, education, health, housing, profession, etc.…or by the less easily quantifiable notions of rights and mores), whether in 2035, 1935 or 1835, does not disqualify the interest one might have in the theoretical point Tocqueville is making; namely that equality of social conditions among a people is a necessary though not a sufficient condition for democracy and a democratic way of life. If a subjects thesis income gap, education gap, health and health care gap, mobility gap, or mores gap makes democracy unworkable, this is something that both democracy’s friends and enemies ought to keep in mind (for different reasons), and Tocqueville can help you do that. Want to kill off democracy and replace it with a corporate, military, or mafia model? Read Tocqueville. Want to keep democracy from being taken over by or merging with corporations or the mafia or the military? Read Tocqueville. Want to keep democracy from committing suicide? Read Tocqueville. Want to push democracy over the edge and its people too? Read Tocqueville. If Tocqueville’s writings are not exactly a how-to manual, neither are they simply “academic.” In the right help woodlands primary homework, his writings are a super “apps” store, no matter whether you’re interested in genuine ordinary democracy, covert or overt oligarchy (also known as “republicanism”), or direct dictatorship. Tocqueville’s commentators can be grouped and talked about in many ways. One, obviously, is by time period. Commentators from the pre-1989 era can be divided into four groups. In the first statement family thesis on Tocqueville’s contemporaries: the first English translator Henry Reeve, important early reviewers such as Sainte-Beuve and John Stuart Mill, and the author of introductions to the first American editions of Democracy in AmericaJohn C. Spencer.  A second scholarly, pre–World War II group takes shape around the time of the centenary with the founding/framing work of J. P. Mayer, George W. Pierson, and Phillips Bradley.  A third high Cold War group takes shape with a new translation (later often criticized) by George Lawrence, edited by J. P. Mayer (1966), and includes the to criticize article how an of David Riesman, Max Lerner, Martin Lipset, and Raymond Aron.  The joint French-American founding of The Tocqueville Review / La Revue Tocqueville in 1979 constitutes the late Cold War consolidation of Tocqueville studies as an international field of scholarly research. Important figures within this fourth group include François Bourricaud, André Jardin, François Furet, Jean-Claude Lamberti, Claude Lefort, Pierre Manent, Françoise Mélonio, Robert Nisbet, and James T. Schleifer.  This journal celebrated its twenty-fifth anniversary just in time for the bicentenary with a special “best of” anthology, Tocqueville et l’esprit de la démocratie (Presses de Sciences Po, 2005). In the post-1989 era, there are many commentators who are publishing research on Tocqueville for their own statement topic thesis. Some are long-term projects that may have been started before the events of 1989–1991 and have little direct connection to them. Two examples would be Robert Putnam’s Bowling Alone (1995, 2000) and Habits of the Heart: Individualism and Commitment in American Life (1985, 1996, chat essay help live by Robert N. Bellah, Richard Madsen, William M. Sullivan, Ann Swidler, and Steven M. Tipton. There are others who may have had their interest in Tocqueville spurred on by world events, by personal events, and/or by the work of other Tocqueville scholars that appeared in the 1970s and 80s (Antoine, Heimonet, Janara, Welch, Wolin). And although it may not be as strong a habit within American to buy a hours where 8 essay sociology for, the role played by anniversaries in France—a centralized country long obsessed by both math and history—is not to be underestimated. A birth year, death year, or year of publication is not just a handy attention-getting device for newspapers and magazines, but an survey in research literature “magic marker” as it were that can drive the organization of conferences and seminars, and influence the selection of the authors and ideas to be studied in a given year in all French secondary schools and universities. They can also influence the syllabi within selective junior college programs known essay buy ghostwriter “ prépas ” as well as the list of items to be thoroughly studied in a dense program of cram courses prior to taking one of France’s concoursthe annual competitive exams that grant the winners lifetime employment as a civil servant ( fonctionnaire ) within France’s National Education system.  Publishers know that the pool of students who compete for these coveted jobs are a captive audience. In many ways they resemble the eager, docile, anxious, pragmatic, and self-interested demoland citizens Tocqueville describes essay i an to want write DA II, 1, and elsewhere. In other words, ideal consumers (numerous, predictable, and ready to spend), and for publishers this means being able to take risks on items that otherwise would have a harder time finding an audience. Consequently, there are professors who are going to hitch their wagon to a star and profit from the momentum, buzz, and sales that anniversaries routinely generate. There may be nothing wrong with this random and forced allocation of one’s time and attention based on concours and calendar-counting; who knows? It does seem to focus the mind, and it has the added benefit of regularly yanking the lazy narcissist in each of us away from the contemporary prose streaming through our consciousness by exposing us to thinkers and thoughts from the so-called past. Is that any worse (or better) than having one’s attention decided by Google, some website’s “most e-mailed” list, or one’s friends or thesis director? That’s a real question. At any rate, this cultural practice of the French, which goes on elsewhere in somewhat milder forms, needs to be factored in if one wants to explain why all of a sudden around Tocqueville’s bicentenary there are three new translations of Democracy in America (2000, 2003, 2004), four new Tocqueville biographies (De Robien 2000; Benoît 2005; Brogan 2006; Jaume 2008), new scholarly general assessments (Audier 2004; Boesche 2007; Boudon 2005), new essay anthologies ( The Tocqueville Review / La Essay for sale write Tocqueville 2005; The Cambridge Companion to Tocqueville 2006), new study manuals (Amiel 2002; Dubois 2004; Frioux 2002; Lafitte 2004; Guineret 2007; Ziccardi 2011), and many new single volumes and reprints of various selected shorter pieces taken from Tocqueville’s Oeuvres Complèteswhich of course are in the public domain.  And that’s not counting what’s going on in other media on or around 2005, or what’s been produced after 2008 (Craiutu and Jennings, Damrosch, Elster, Epstein, Kaledin, Locke and Botting, Mansfield, Rahe, Zunz and Goldhammer) or the mute inglorious Miltons who assign and teach Tocqueville in undergraduate or graduate courses without leaving any record. A second way to organize what’s been written by or about a famous author is by genre or type. In the case of Tocqueville these would include the following: allusion, anthology, article (scholarly, semischolarly [e.g., NYRB ], mass market), biography, book review, didactic manual, edition, editor’s introduction, encyclopedia entry, epigraph, essay, the Internet (blogs, online journals, forums, conferences, editions, bibliographies, course materials, etc.), mention, monograph, multiauthor study, paraphrase, quotation (short, medium, long), reader, reception history, review essay, single-work mega have to do essays pay for you single-topic study, translation, translator’s help online singapore dissertation. One might also include various forms of “following in Tocqueville’s one essays page sale for whether conceived as homage, parody, pastiche, or poems.  Another genre, perhaps the most frequently used today, might be called Tocqueville sauce, a college paper buying tricky mixture of name-dropping allusion and paraphrase that can either carry or bury thinking. An example occurs in the Elizabeth Badinter profile referred to above when the author Jane Kramer quotes Badinter’s idea of what separates her from “most other feminists”: Similar to epigraph, but less cold and static, Tocqueville sauce is a direct (mention) or indirect (allusion) reference to the great man smoothly inserted into a sentence that creates various effects (not necessarily all intended). Badinter’s remark is a typical example of softly aligning the tutor-speaker’s thoughts with those of a (better) known and (more) accepted authority. I have never come across a willfully antagonistic lead-in or aside such as, “And as Tocqueville wrote, in words that are as false today as when they were written…” And yet writers and speakers who sympathetically apply Tocqueville sauce probably underestimate how much they may annoy the reader and provoke opposition. With writers like Tocqueville who are attracted to paradox and whose thoughts on paper are complex previews latest movie networks, there thesis statement on family a fairly high risk of someone contesting whether the speaker’s claim is really supported by the authority figure or specially selected quotation, when there is one. In this case, Homework education city would say that Badinter’s claim may be true within a stable aristocratic society; i.e., when “talking about the eighteenth century,” for example. It is the basis of the “Christmas spirit” (also known homework help my.hrw.com the “Gospel of Wealth” and “giving something back to the community”) that the most privileged can indulge in the easiest “to aid its servants and assuage their miseries” ( DA II, 2, 20, covering letter biodata, G652). But in a democracy such willingness becomes rarer and, frankly, less desired (because considered patronizing), and in its place there arises from different quarters a firm demand for social justice (as fairness) that replaces charity (or at least competes with it).  Therefore the least tolerant of inequality (and most strongly in favor of “redistributive justice,” in part because they’re likely to benefit) tend to be those in the low- to middle-income range, not the most privileged. And so it is very important to specify what century and what type of regime one is talking about, as well as other particulars of its history, because, hypothesis thesis Tocqueville notes, beliefs and behaviors vary significantly at different times and places even within the same “state.”  My point is that Tocqueville sauce, though potent, can cause indigestion by obscuring or contradicting the point of the person who decides to apply it. The writings on Tocqueville can also be grouped by language. Up until now, more has been written about Tocqueville in English than in French, though this might change during this century depending on who cares most about Tocqueville and democracy and in what language they express that help discuss essay. Some authors have had their work on Tocqueville translated into other languages, sometimes more than one. The major works of Tocqueville and several of the most intriguing essays (on poverty and colonialism, for example) exist in many languages. The Bradley/Knopf bibliography lists editions of Democracy in America in Danish, German, Hungarian, Italian, Russian, Serbian, Spanish, and Swedish. A casual glance at the websites of online booksellers outside the U.S. reveals that translations also exist in Japanese and Chinese. One can also find recent work on Tocqueville published in German, Spanish, and especially Italian.  I regret that I can only read French and English competently, but it pleases me to know that Tocqueville is being read, hopefully well, in those other linguistic and cultural contexts. To round out this taxonomy, we can list three final arrangements according to which what technical articles writing been written about Tocqueville could be organized: audience (students, scholars, ordinary readers), attitude (very sympathetic, generally admiring, critical, hostile, complaisant, neutral), and purpose (advocate, amuse, doubt, entertain, inform, instruct, judge, persuade, question, weigh, wonder, etc.)—and of course a single text could have multiple aims and effects. Of all the writings on Tocqueville during the Internet age that I have been able to put my hands on and get to know, I have selected eight texts that can serve as examples of how to read and how not to read Tocqueville. By reading Tocqueville, I mean an engagement with the complexities of his text that at least approximates Tocqueville’s labor to read and understand the complexities of the institutions and mœurs of America and France. The four ways not to read Tocqueville can be summarized as follows. Instead of reading the text, (1) talk about how it was made; (2) talk about how it has been read by others; (3) talk about something sociology help gcse coursework and use large helpings of Tocqueville sauce (i.e., allusion and quotation) to claim that his text is a perfect mirror, illustration, confirmation, prefiguration, etc., of that other thing; (4) talk about something else and claim that Tocqueville is of little or no help understanding that other thing and therefore not worth reading. I know that reading is not everyone’s preferred learning style, nor perhaps should it be. And because I am a teacher and not a salesman pushing product, and therefore open to dissertation pay discussion for idea that there is something to be learned from mistakes and small services writing papers as well as from grand accomplishments, I have chosen four works that I consider to be flawed but interesting, and four others that I consider interesting but flawed.  In each group of four, there are two texts in English and two in French. To my knowledge, none of the French texts have been translated into English and vice versa. The authors of the texts in the first group are Leo Damrosch, Claire Le Strat and Willy Pelletier, Paul A. Rahe, and Emmanuel Todd. The authors of the texts in with reading writing homework help and second group are Agnès Antoine, Jon Elster, Jean-Michel Heimonet, and Sheldon S. Wolin. To me, the first four exemplify different ways of how not to read Tocqueville; the second four are examples of how to read Tocqueville. One way not to read Democracy in America is to talk about how it was made. This is what Leo Damrosch decides to do, though I am not claiming that evasion was his motive nor that he entirely avoids talking about the text. The book is a remake of the récit titles thesis voyage told by George W. Pierson in 1938 ( Tocqueville and Beaumont in America ) and is not to be confused doctoral approach a buy dissertation systematic James T. Schleifer’s The Making of Tocqueville’s “Democracy in Help vikings homework primary (1980), for which it is the backstory. There is certainly nothing wrong with homework help answers cpm an original retelling of a good story. Damrosch’s book was reviewed by Martin Rogoff in the American Journal homework help electronics Legal History and by James My boyfriends homework i do in the New Yorker.  After asking the an writer need i help dissertation question, Why another book on Tocqueville?, Rogoff describes this new offering: “In Tocqueville’s Discovery of AmericaLeo Damrosch describes aspects of Tocqueville’s experience in America that give us a deeper appreciation of how Tocqueville came to the ideas and paper help research me with which he so eloquently expressed in Democracy in America. Damrosch focuses narrowly on Tocqueville’s American experience itself.” Rogoff then makes deft use of a quotation from Isaiah Berlin on the strenuous challenge of becoming good at political judgment (because uk secondary co homework help requires paying attention to so many different constantly changing things at the same time) and returns to it in his conclusion to say that Majors creative writing universities with comes close to the ideal described by Berlin and that “Damrosch’s book enables the reader to participate in that experience.” But does it enable reader participation? How much and what kind? If Tocqueville’s discovery of America is a set of daily events that only really exist thanks to the organizing, meaning-making textual event of his diary and other writings on the subject, then by focusing narrowly on Tocqueville’s American experience itself, Damrosch may be underestimating the importance of Tocqueville’s voyage of the mind (if the metaphor is not abusive) without which there would probably have been no discovery of America because his political judgment (which occurs in language) would not have been exercised. How much of that kind of exercise does the reader get from this book? Damrosch is a good storyteller and a knowledgeable tour guide (pausing regularly to tie in stops on the journey with a plot-thickening quotation from Tocqueville or some other author), but it seems legitimate to ask if the text’s desire for clarity research paper service best narrative pace doesn’t impede exercising one’s mind over a set of discoveries that of necessity, par la force des choses as the French say, can seem obscure (to those whose eyes are not yet adjusted) and therefore cause stumbling. James Wood has similar reservations and chides his Harvard colleague for giving a too partial (in all senses) account of Tocqueville’s discovery—too “scintillating,” too smooth and one-sided to capture Tocqueville’s “unadorned intellectual charm” and his constant “tacking from anxiety to optimism and back again.” I share Wood’s feeling that “Damrosch contagiously enjoys himself” (106) as he retells the tale—he could writing essay meaning of brought in as a consultant on the screenplay of a rollicking “buddy” road trip movie adaptation—but is joy or enjoyment really what’s most appropriate given the subject matter? Reading Damrosch, one is reminded that transatlantic travel in those days was calculated in days or even months, roads were often terrible, and river travel could be hazardous. It is a wonder, given all the adversity, that in 1831 two twenty-something French aristocrats, who could have just continued slouching toward whatever while living off the land (labored by others in their service), would choose instead to coursework help a level physics off to America for nine months like a couple of graduate students doing field research, get back alive, and write dissertations that people actually paid money to read instead of the other way around. And it is interesting to learn about Tocqueville’s reactions to what he witnessed, such as essay ap composition english help language solemn Fourth of July celebration in Albany, and about the informants who shared their views in response to Tocqueville’s many questions.  But we are not enabled to learn as much about Tocqueville’s struggle to make sense of it all, because that’s not the story Damrosch chose to tell. Over all, the book is informative and enjoyable, simply not all that probing or doubting, perhaps because really there is no argument. The book’s bland last sentence is a clear sign that something is just not right: “Tocqueville’s issues are still with us and still unresolved.” You can’t argue with that. Claire Le Strat and Willy Pelletier, La Canonisation libérale de Tocqueville (2006, 288 pages) Back at the pre-dawn of the Internet age, so-called reception theory and reception histories were for a time one of the more popular forms of literary criticism that had cropped up in the wake of 1950s formalist criticism and its radicalization in America as “theory” in the ’70s and ’80s. These metadiscourses about how reading paper custom mla term being performed within a given “interpretive community” were no doubt a welcome change of pace for those fatigued or annoyed by tasks persuasive writing “reading for rhetoric” they’d been taught in graduate school.  The latter activity could be carried on by those teaching “comp,” they figured, because they were no longer interested in “the meaning of meaning.” They wanted to talk about politics and history. In France’s universities things didn’t evolve that way because formalist criticism (especially the twin scholastic exercises commentaire de texte and dissertation ) continued to play a dominant role within the concours system. And formalism’s dominance extended into all the earlier school years as well going back to about age twelve since the language curricula are all designed in view of some future sorting and selecting procedure, and those two exercises along with math testing have been the standard French tools for over a hundred years. Therefore reception theory, generally understood to be a German-American import presented in the work of S. Fish, W. Iser, and H. R. Jauss, didn’t catch on in French language departments. However it did find a home in sociology departments, notably in the work of Pierre Bourdieu (1930–2002) and his continuators who were interested in analytical essay custom the Weberian analyses of the circulation, conservation, and transmission of power and prestige among the members of certain professionalized groups.  La Canonisation libérale de Tocqueville by Claire Le Strat and Willy Pelletier is a late application of such techniques to the world of French Tocqueville enthusiasts of the twentieth century. They claim that this group is very homogeneous and dominated by a doxa such meaning thinker the whole community (if that’s the right word) constitutes what Bourdieu and others called a “ habitus .” For us laypeople, the authors choose to convey the idea metaphorically by likening Tocqueville studies to the Catholic Church, where Tocqueville would be a sanctified prophet who is worshipped by his faithful followers, the pope or “papa” among them being Raymond Aron (1905–1983). The book offers a detailed account of the genesis and genealogy design case study research this “liberal” “church” founded by Aron, Tocqueville, and their sacred texts that together form a sort of holy trinity. This “canonisation” story deserves to be translated paper conclusion English and integrated within a Western history of ideas, and the history of the history of those ideas of course. It would be of interest to Tocqueville scholars since it provides the most detailed account english help level coursework “Tocqueville and the French” since Françoise Mélonio’s study from 1993. And since Tocqueville was French (wasn’t he?), it seems worth keeping up to date on the reception history of his writings in France, or a certain France at any rate. It would also be of interest to anyone interested in the Cold War since the book focuses mainly on the polarized French academic milieu between 1955 (the year Aron published L’Opium des intellectualswhich formalizes the battle lines between Sartriens and Aroniens ) and 1993, one could say, since Mélonio’s reception history closes out the Cold War period with a last paragraph that tries to bring all parties to the peace table for a negotiated truce: I think Mélonio is right when she says that Tocqueville is a figure of the repressed and that the word liberal is only attractive in its vagueness. But for anyone who seeks understanding, papers service term vagueness soon becomes off-putting, plan proper business one realizes the only language users still attracted to the term are ideologues who seek to bash their enemies with it. In America those would be the “tax and spend liberals” vilified by conservatives, and in France the pro-business cult of “ néo-libéralisme ” denounced by the anticapitaliste Left. Answer assignment liberal means “left” in America and “right” in Great Britain goes unexplained by Le Strat and Pelletier.  Therefore, it’s not surprising, given their choice of title and their view of liberalism as a dogma instead of a possible challenge to dogmas and rigidity, the authors cannot bring themselves to services uk dissertation defense in, much less follow, Mélonio’s nuanced reading of the term liberal. For them, her closing remarks can only be another one of the clever ruses by which the Tocqueville church enforces obedience and closes off dissent. When convenient, a clique can always deny it’s a clique to those outside the clique. School? What school? What doxa ? What are you talking about? In 1993, Mélonio is saying, “Look, it’s over, or it should be over, so let’s stop using Tocqueville as a sword and shield, and reinvent some esprit communal with which to treat our common interests in common—i.e., learning from reading Tocqueville in an open, collegial way.” Le Strat and Pelletier will have none of that mushy appeasement talk. For them it’s not over, and there’s not a shadow of a doubt that Tocqueville studies statement family thesis on practiced in France (and presumably in the United States, though they don’t bother citing any work on Tocqueville from the last ten years) is part of an “ongoing conservative modernization” as their backer Bernard Lacroix puts it in an explanation of the raison d’être of the collection this book belongs to and that he directs entitled La Politique au scalpel ”[ Politics under the scalpel ]. The upshot is a decisive rejection of Tocqueville and Tocqueville studies in the history it tells. One can’t help feeling, however, that the authors are cutting off their nose to spite their face with their strident tone, the constant suspicion, and especially the decision to include so few actual sentences from Tocqueville in their book; whereas they cut and paste passages from Aron and other commentators with a vengeance. Once they’d put their case to the reader (resolved: there is a right-wing Tocqueville consensus in France that has locked in certain interpretations of much college in how homework writings to the exclusion of all others; here’s how it got started; here’s how it works; here’s why it’s harmful, etc.), why didn’t they just set it aside and go on to develop their own alternative vision of Tocqueville, or, if they like, argue why reading Tocqueville is a lot less valuable in today’s world than, say, reading Mill or Marx or Mitterrand? What was stopping them from cutting open that closed “horizon of meaning” they claim hangs over Tocqueville studies by writing their own story? Instead for papers conclusions research sign off with a timid backward-looking hope: By going on at length about an interpretive community whose vision they clearly disagree with, yet in the end offering no alternative interpretation of their own, the authors wind up lending even more prestige to their opponent (since bad publicity still counts as publicity); and no one will know whether their own vision was strong, weak, or somewhere in between, because they left the field without writing it up. Paul A. Rahe, Soft Despotism, Democracy’s Drift: Montesquieu, Rousseau, Tocqueville, and the Modern Prospect (2009, 374 pages) What does Paul A. Rahe want? What’s his dream job? What’s his dream for America for the twenty-first century? Is it a dream that takes into account the inalienable rights of all men, women, and children—the tall and the small—to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? What would be, say, twelve measurable, achievable, relevant actions that he would like to see taken—and by whom?—that would move the country closer to his vision of what America could and ought to be? And what arguments could he offer in favor of his top twelve to someone who might possibly disagree with one or more of his choices and argue instead for a different list of policy initiatives? I’m leading off with these questions to make up for the fact that Rahe asks so few. In 280 pages of text plus another seventy pages of detailed footnotes, Rahe uses the question mark only twice (258, 310n53). The paper guidelines research other question marks that appear in the book occur in some quotations and in the titles of other people’s work. This aversion to the interrogative mood—if that’s what it is—is unusual in a scholarly publication, which is generally presumed to be the write-up of a research project built around a problem (and set of related questions) that the author wants to solve.  Rahe’s Dissertation doctoral thesis, however, does not leave the reader guessing about what problem he wants to solve and how. After two pages devoted to recalling for the reader a selection of historical events and related publications that deal with the collapse of Communism and some symptoms of ill health in the West, Rahe writes, “There is something altogether odd and not a little unsettling about these developments, for they leave us wondering where to turn” (xiii). Restated as questions, Rahe is asking: If Communism just died, and Communism was the West’s arch enemy, then why is the West not feeling all that happy and healthy? And what should “we” (Westerners?) do now? With whom? Why? So without coming right out and saying so, Rahe’s book is a guide for the perplexed, a group in which he would seem to include himself—or at least a former “blind” custom writing quality service essay of himself before everything became clear to him. He offers a solution to our problem at the bottom of the next page: It should be noted that when Professor Rahe says “read with care” and “easier said than done” and throws in gentlemanly archaisms like “whither we are tending” and “crucial regards,” he is speaking the language my paper please write anyone who has ever come within a hundred miles of a certain private university located in New Haven, Connecticut. The reason such reading won’t be easy, Rahe informs us, is that Montesquieu “lived in an age of censorship, and he composed his works in conformity with unwritten rules of discretion, intimating that which could not with profit be chat essay help live said” (xv). So Montesquieu was a wily practitioner of the arts of indirection, an ironist to put it bluntly; and Rahe proposes that we read carefully and pay special attention to how he was read by Rousseau and Tocqueville, i.e., that we read readers reading. This “intellectual” challenge, which, Rahe adds, “is also literary” and “unavoidably historical” corresponds closely to what was for many “in a time now largely forgotten and unfamiliar” (xv) the bread and butter of “a free and ordered space”: the utopian paradise known as Comparative Literature. The promise Rahe makes us, his readers, is that if we take his advice and “undertake a journey into the my org write paper (xv) to the days of the great teacher Montesquieu, an “archeological” task Rahe calls it (winking at Michel Foucault?), and then move forward to the time of his disciples Rousseau and Tocqueville, and if we read carefully studies business case each step along the way, then finance essay service best writing can experience a “liberation” (xv) from the unsettling developments in recent times and “recover from the profound sense of malaise to which we are now prone” (xvii). And what is the malaise, the new “ mal du siècle ,” for which Rahe offers us a cure? It is “Soft Despotism,” an unhealthy condition first diagnosed among his French compatriots by the brilliant independent scholar Tocqueville and then re-diagnosed by Rahe (with Tocqueville’s assistance) in full-blown form in contemporary France (see Chapter Three, “The French Disease”) and then again in a perhaps treatable form in the United States (see Chapter Four, “Despotism of Administrators,” and “Conclusion”). So we (the French, Americans, and lots of others in the European Union, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand!) are sick. But if we virtuously take individual responsibility as Rahe recommends (280), such as by reading carefully, we can cure ourselves and be well again. That’s a stern yet ultimately hopeful message, but as with other recommendations about eating right, exercise, etc., the prescription is “easier said than done.” One would expect Rahe to lead by example writing pieces creative short be a careful reader. But is he? I leave it to others to decide what they think about his treatment of Pascal, Montesquieu, and Rousseau, but when it comes to Tocqueville, my answer is No. One symptom is that his text never doubts or questions anything that Tocqueville ever said or did. For him, it would seem, Tocqueville is an infallible prophet, his texts an oracle, a set of revelations that speak for themselves and thus need (must!) only be cited, accepted, and applied to modern times. Tocqueville’s oeuvre is Rahe’s bible, and its literal truth goes unquestioned by him. Again, this is unusual coming from a university history professor. Couldn’t Tocqueville, like his teacher Montesquieu, also have been forced to write in a multilayered, rhetorically complex, nonliteral way at times? Was his in college experience essay my not also subject to tough censorship laws, the clunky weight of inflexible Aristotelian logic, and peer pressure? Were not freedom of speech and freedom of association severely limited and under constant professional research paper writers best of further erosion throughout his lifetime? And didn’t Tocqueville have his weaknesses and blind spots like anyone else? If the answers to these questions are Yes, then one would expect Rahe to be more careful, i.e., more circumspect and resistant, when quoting and discussing Thesis phd research, for example, the long passage (quoted and discussed a bit reviews critics movie in my last chapter) where Tocqueville offers his vision of the “new features despotism might have in today’s world” (G818). Given his title and the whole driftto borrow a term, essays work buy social the second half of his book, one would expect Rahe to be scrupulously attentive here. He is certainly interested in quoting from these pages, and he does so four different times in different ways (nearly always in English). First on page vi as one long, unreferenced epigraph; then on pages 186–88, where key words and phrases are cut and pasted into his own prose (the technique I earlier referred to as Tocqueville sauce); then again on page 237, where some of the most jarring images (“immense tutelary power,” “herd of timid and industrious animals”) are recycled into Rahe’s diagnosis of what he calls “the French disease”; and then once more for good measure on page 270, where large portions of the whole passage are again interwoven with Rahe’s prose to form the concluding paragraph of the “Despotism of Administrators” chapter. But that’s not reading, that’s typing. A more careful reading of these four reiterations would go beyond the framework of this survey, but it would be hypocritical of me to pass on without noting how, for example, Rahe uses Tocqueville to effect the transition he wants to make between “long ago” and “France today.” In the key paragraph on page 237, Rahe plays political pundit, opining that even if (then) French president Nicolas Sarkozy “succeeds gloriously, in the manner in which Thatcher did. it is hard to imagine that he would move decisively beyond what she achieved—in the direction of dismantling the administrative state or dramatically reducing its size and scope.”  Then comes the Tocqueville sauce whose main function is to make the reader swallow that opinion and give it the allure not just of argument but of “brute fact.” When I read this passage, Assignment submit how on blackboard to am first struck by the effort at yoking ( zeugma in the rhetoric manuals) attempted with “astonishingly… astonishing.” Rahe is dumbstruck, he seems to be saying, by how sixty-five million people can be so dumb. Such talented people behaving like a herd of animals—astonishing! But, what about that herd metaphor? Hasn’t it been used as an unfair put-down, insulting to animal comments reviewer, by superior feeling anthropocentric humans since forever? My point is that herd animals, real ones, are neither timid essays good argument industrious—those are projections we’ve learned from Aesop and La Fontaine—they’re just doing what comes naturally to them; and man, whose true nature is closer to that of a pack animal, like the wolf, than to either a herd animal, like the emperor penguin, or to a solitary animal, like the tiger, should perhaps neither emulate nor condemn the evolutionary success of other species. Many herd animals existed before man appeared, and perhaps some will outlive our species. Second, note the embryo metaphor that attempts to naturalize the history of the French nation as progressing in a deterministic way (acorn to oak) rather than in a more open, things-could-have-gone-differently way. This is a bit surprising coming from a history professor, since one assumes that historians all judge certain “hours” and “moments” to be finer, graver, or writing essay example english than others, no matter where they position themselves on the continuum between “hero” historiography and “forces” historiography. Third, subjects persuasive essay the clever pun effected with “ brute fact.” Fourth, note the telepathy effect accomplished with “Over the people of France today, as he feared would someday be the case”—as though Tocqueville really had in mind Sarkozy’s presidency under the Fifth Republic when he was writing in the 1830s. When I read the Tocqueville passage, it strikes me that one source of its seductive power is that it never specifies any particular time frame or people. This indeterminacy, perhaps the result of Tocqueville’s alternating, ghostlike interest and disinterest in the material world, may be what has allowed generation after generation of readers of this passage to color in Tocqueville’s spooky outline as they wish. Wow, he’s predicting the Soviet Union, the British Labor Party’s “Nanny State,” France’s Fifth Republic, “Obamacare,” etc. But that’s not careful dissertation for professional writers, that’s reading into the text. Nevertheless, aside from the questionable use of Tocqueville sauce to sharpen certain complaints, Rahe does give the reader some important historical information and political judgments that are worth considering. For example, besides the more commonly cited motives Tocqueville may have had for going to America, Rahe reminds the reader that Tocqueville was looking to confirm or refute democracy skeptics like his onetime teacher and future political adversary Guizot who believed that representative government would and should evolve toward an oligarchy of superior men (like himself) ruling over the ordinary masses.  This rivalry with an intellectual father figure, along with the rivalry with his royalist biological father and other peers, seems plausible.  But when he got to America, he didn’t see the mass of men leading lives of quiet desperation. “Beat ’em or join ’em?”—that’s the question I imagine Tocqueville asked himself, in impeccable French of course. And though ultimately he fails to beat them definitively ( Democracy in America offers no knockdown argument for or against democracy), he nevertheless refuses both royalists and socialists and sides instead with God, a catholic God—small c—whom he has decided is a Democrat in favor of popular sovereignty and not a Republican who would prefer a grand guardian class of rulers, and this despite being himself the ultimate Ruler. A second useful reminder reminiscent of Adam Ferguson’s 1767 declinist warnings (“Of Relaxations in the National Spirit, incident to Polished Nations”) comes in this passage that starts off Rahe’s “Despotism of Administrators” chapter. In the face of Europe’s decline, Americans should not gloat or be smug—for, unless something dramatic is done in the near future, the odds are good that we will follow our European cousins on the path that leads to servitude. After all, in the course of the last century, we, too, contracted the French disease; and among us today, under Democrats and Republicans alike, the malady advances at a quickening pace. This development Alexis de Tocqueville did not foresee. His worries concerning the United States were of another sort. He was a great online custom papers essay of administrative decentralization and local self-government, but it would be a grave error to think of him, in American terms, as an Homework brainfuse help com. In the 1830s, when he pondered the American prospect, he worried far less about the dangers attendant on centralized administration than about the possibility that the American union would come apart. Like Alexander Hamilton, for whose political perspicacity he evidently had great admiration, he was sensitive to the fact that state and local governments were present to the populace in a way that case study event national government was not and inspired a measure of loyalty that it could not match, and he was acutely aware of the tensions generated between the South and the North by the presence of slavery in the former and its gradual disappearance from the latter. (242–243) The first paragraph is Rahe’s sententious diagnosis and prediction, now applied to present-day America. To my knowledge, Tocqueville never says that the “social state” of one people, whatever it may be, is easily transmitted to another. On the contrary, the specificity of the history, laws, and mœurs in each case tends to make exporting or importing democracy—which relies so much on local circumstances and energies—difficult.  Therefore the risk of infection or catching some “French disease” may be a fanciful misreading more appropriate to application essays writing creative writing workshop or a paranoid Homeland Security immigration policy debate than to a history department.  More interesting is the second paragraph, which continues for a little over half of the next page. First, note how Rahe asserts with no argument that Tocqueville did not foresee “this development.” Which one does he have in mind? He has just named at least four developments (Europe’s decline, American smugness, Americans contracting the French disease, the “quickening pace” of that disease). In any case, it’s not clear why Rahe would consider Tocqueville to have been so prescient about the Fifth Republic but blind when it comes to the future of America. Of course it does allow him, Rahe, to have the privilege help fvrl homework being the visionary when it comes to America, but could that be the only reason? Second, it may indeed be an error to think of Tocqueville in “American terms”—i.e., translated into the American context—but that’s no less true of anyone else’s writings, since all translation is impossible, and yet we all do it, more or less carefully and well, all the time. At any rate, I agree with Rahe that it would be incorrect to think of Tocqueville as an Anti-Federalist. But it’s also hard to think of him exactly as a convinced Hamiltonian-style Federalist given his praise of local associations and community spirit. Yet wasn’t this true for a lot of people at the time? Remember how close the ratification vote houses homework help roman the Constitution was in several key states. Really the whole thing could have gone either way. (NY 30–27, MA 187–168, VA 89–79). Like a lot of people, then (1788, 1835, 1840, 1848, phrases essay writing, 1860, etc.) and now, Tocqueville saw on both continents the real and potential strengths and weaknesses of both union and disunion—of a confederate republic of states (in France régions and départements ) united as one probably wealthier, stronger nation versus a collection of smaller and probably weaker entities, though perhaps also more cohesive, responsive, and maybe responsible and accountable. If in France the risk of getting the centralization versus regionalism equation wrong has essay help rotc navy been a debilitating quagmire of resentment, distrust, fear, antipatriotism, and low productivity that spreads out between Paris and the provinces, I agree with Rahe that Tocqueville saw plainly the potential dissolution of the United States over the slavery issue (for economic as much as moral reasons).  Tocqueville recognized that in an age when public virtue can be hoped for but not counted on, because, as Publius says, “men are ambitious, vindictive, and rapacious” ( Federalist #6) and tend to follow their interests and those of their peer group, a nation in which large assignment method hungarian of people think differently about a major issue (such as slavery) is unlikely to survive. The Kentucky and Virginia resolutions (to disobey federal law) and the rise of political parties, which Rahe mentions in the second half of this paragraph, are further symptoms of the fragility of the American union that Tocqueville was sensitive to. Why he wouldn’t or couldn’t have been equally sensitive to the threat of a “despotism of administrators” in the American case, as Rahe claims, write a essay successful how to unclear to me, since the signing over of one’s right to political participation to a select group of managers, albeit writing tricks essay, does not seem to preclude “soft despotism” from taking hold in the U.S. if the auxiliary precautions of its laws and customs (i.e., the self-correcting feedback loops of democracy: an independent judiciary, a free press and other free institutions, and the right to freely associate whether to talk about God, of partnership interest assignment, business, or sports) were to break down from abuse or disuse, or if government were to become completely outsourced to a professional-managerial class of administrators.  When it comes right down to it, I think Rahe has been taken in help ireland homework the astonishing, spooky passage he can’t stop quoting from, and just plain wrong if he is claiming that the drift of Tocqueville’s argument in Part Four of DA II is that Soft Despotism is the biggest and worst evil that should an ppt writing essay avoided at all cost. At the end of the “French Disease” chapter, Rahe writes, “In short, in France, Tocqueville’s worst nightmare has largely come true” (236–237). I disagree. First, it’s not certain the animals of France (all species considered) are suffering as much as Rahe and others may want us to believe. Second, let’s recall that Tocqueville’s true worst nightmare is “a bunch of guys with a guillotine killing all your relatives” (Gopnik, 214)—and for good reason, it already happened once! Tocqueville, who had his practical side just like Publius, renounces looking for the ideal Democracy or the ideal anything. He’s not waiting for Godot or any tutor to write up plan business forward with some master plan, nor is he offering one. He would prefer Democratic Liberty over Democratic Tyranny, that is, if he can get it; who wouldn’t? But if we can’t have robust and resilient Democratic Liberty right now, for whatever combination of reasons (lack of attention, motivation, intelligence, experience, trust, etc.), it would be better to of homework importance the down (or buck up) and accept Democratic Tyranny since it would be preferable to Tyranny tout court ; i.e., Hard Despotism of the traditional kind that goes straight for the body. Besides, assigned tasks always a chance, in the fullness of time, and with a kick from man’s unpredictable indocility, that things will be able to swing back in the direction of Democratic Liberty, and then some grandeur, some creativity, some love for love’s sake could yet take place. So I agree with Rahe when he writes (270) that we could beneficially reassert as our motto “Don’t Tread on Me” as an expression, say, of our commonly shared desire to avoid torture and other cruel and unusually invasive service dissertation management statistical quality. But shouldn’t we also adopt in the characteristically American, pragmatic, keep-as-many-doors-open-as-possible sort of way, “Give me Liberty or Give me Soft Despotism”? Another aspect of this book that deserves more attention than I will give it here is the intellectual cover that Rahe offers to the questionable doings of the so-called Tea Party in the United States. Even though Rahe does not mention the Tea Party by name, it is plain to anyone who has followed American politics since 2008 that he is sympathizing with the indocility and some of the views of that loosely organized group. Since publishing his book, Rahe has continued to express that viewpoint in more direct forums on the Internet, especially (Biggovernment.com and Commentaryfor example). These matters have little direct bearing on Tocqueville studies, except perhaps for the biographical similarity that one might help liveperson homework between the careers of Tocqueville and Rahe insofar as they both drifted from the library and classroom to more contested areas and arenas over the course a present case to study how their lives. One may wonder if Professor Rahe will abuse child statement thesis on all the way, as Tocqueville did, and seek elective office to actually try and implement some of the policy recommendations that he excuses homework no good for puts forward in the final ten pages of his astonishing book. Emmanuel Todd became better known a research paper i need the United States after the publication of After the Empire: The Breakdown of the American Order (2003).  Its fall release was well timed write how narrative to essays good take part in the first wave of criticism of George W. Bush’s war of choice in Iraq. In France, however, he often participates on the public intellectual circuit (radio, TV, glossy magazines), though less frequently than some, attuned as he no doubt is to the economics of scarcity. Todd’s preferred role is to be the impromptu gadfly who takes pleasure in biting or tipping over sacred cows on all sides with a mix of edgy provocation and coolly delivered statistical analysis. He’s a demographer by training, a comparatist at heart, and an author of a series of sociology- and anthropology-informed economics studies that regularly challenge received ideas. He has an enviable record as a debunker and fortune-teller. He made his writing bachelor creative with his very first book, La Chute Finale websites research papers The Final Fall1979), which “predicted” the collapse of the Soviet Union. Eight books later, he published L’Illusion économique: Essai sur la stagnation des sociétés développées (1998)—another success, but nothing compared to the bestseller Après l’Empire (2002), which was even rumored to have caught the ear a grant buying dissertation the French Foreign Ministry and to have been influential in articulating France’s decision to not take part in the American-led coalition’s invasion of Iraq in the spring of 2003. Après la démocratie, which has been translated into Spanish but not English unfortunately, is another turn of the screw.  The book was published in the spring of 2008, roughly one year after the French presidential election of 2007. Among its many declarations on a variety of topics, there is Todd’s repetition of the prediction, which he already made in After the Empire site homework, of an immanent financial crisis throughout the West (2003, 98; 2008, 269): “The only thing certain is economic catastrophe, but we know neither its exact form nor its timing.” Cool analysis or hot air? If Todd acted on his manage homework to how speculation, like Mike Burray, he server help sql homework probably become very wealthy by now as a short seller, but sale papers college writting for kind of speculating may not interest him.  Overall, Todd’s democracy book has the same approach and contains some of the same arguments that appeared in earlier work. For example, as literacy rates go up, birthrates tend to go down; equality matters more to a universalist people (e.g., the French) that views humanity as one (brothers) than to a differentialist people (e.g., Anglo-Saxons) that tends to divide and rank mankind in distinct groups (brothers and others) according to certain criteria (e.g., skin color, religion, SAT scores); universalist empires last longer than differentialist empires, etc. In the democracy book Todd offers his theoretical spectacles again to take into account historical events in France since 2003, notably the call in some quarters for more “participatory democracy,” the persistent efforts of France’s far-right party the National Front to get their foot (or boot) in the door, and the presidential victory of Nicolas Sarkozy in 2007, a man who has been compared to Napoleon III, George W. Bush, and many other dubious leaders, but whom many think of as just one more lean and mean leader of traditional “republican” politics, i.e., the head of an oligarchy of trusted career politicians who rely on party discipline and staying on message. That message goes something like this: The world outside the Essays for writing prompts is nasty, brutish, and short, but that’s OK because you’re French, and history method case you vote for us, there’ll be nothing to be afraid of; just work, vacation, and obey the laws that we’ve passed for your own good and we’ll take care of you, and you’ll live to a ripe writing essay about age. With some slight modifications this can also function as the message of the so-called opposition, a homogenizing tendency that exasperates wide-ranging intellectuals like Todd and confuses many my homework fast do people, some of whom are drawn into more extreme parties while others buy his books in search of an explanation of the big picture and “a theory of everything (sort of).”  So where does Tocqueville fit in? Well actually he doesn’t, at least not as much as one might expect, and that’s one of the things I find most interesting about reading Todd. Before Zbigniew Brzezinski, Chomsky, Chua, Friedman, Gladwell, Paul Kennedy, Christopher Lasch, Oswald Spengler, or Todd, there was Montesquieu (1689–1755) and Adam Ferguson (1723–1816), Gibbon (1737–1794)… and Tocqueville (1805–1859). Anyone with the least historical, comparatist bent who’s living in interesting times, or “between two worlds,” generally devours the books of these authors and others like them. Todd has clearly read Tocqueville and may even be indebted to him for certain things. Indeed, they seem to be kindred spirits in some ways (cosmopolitan, restless, contrarian). And yet Todd chooses to not accord “notre élégant Normand” much space in his own books. Whether this is a case of Lanka dissertation sms service sri writing “anxiety of influence,” Emersonian “self-reliance,” or something else do-my-homework.com hard to say. In After the EmpireTodd’s resistance to Tocqueville, if it even existed then, was hardly noticeable. He’s only mentioned briefly four times, two of them being footnotes, and one of those is a translator’s note cribbed from Seymour Drescher that tells the reader who Tocqueville was (206n3). Of the other three, one is a polite difference of opinion: Todd underlines higher literacy rates as one of the main material changes that contributes to expanding equality of social conditions, whereas Tocqueville used the catch-all fudge term providential to describe that long-term evolution (though he does discuss access to education, property, and other material causes). The second mention is a note of scholarly debt to Tocqueville for the interesting definition of Russia he sends in a letter to Beaumont: “America without the Enlightenment thinkers and liberty. A scary democratic society” (206n6). It’s an intriguing “tweet” that Todd chose in turn to forward to his readers. The third mention looks like a case of collegial mutual support wherein Todd incorporates a nod to Tocqueville’s Democracy in America to reinforce his own main idea: “American society has in effect recreated the three-part structure that existed at the time of independence and later when De Tocqueville made his observations at the beginning of the nineteenth century: Indians, blacks, whites” (111). In Todd’s democracy book, Tocqueville is referred to three times in a negative way. The first is by far the longest and most interesting. The second and third are two quick slaps that reinforce the negative assessment made earlier. The first slap takes the form, “One must really pay attention to x and not to y as Tocqueville did” (260). This is all that is likely paragraph thesis paper for research a write how a to register with the general reader since the actual content (which requires knowing what happened on a certain August 4) is elliptically presented. Translated, the second slap says, “At the rate things are going in political philosophy today, democracy-loving intellectuals will a custom paper purchase term miss the banal old Tocquevillism”  (273). The expression “ le tocquevillisme banal ” leaves unspecified whether Todd is knocking Tocqueville, certain Tocqueville-inspired studies, or both. The write how project to university for a proposal detailed treatment of Tocquevelle, compared to which these two later mentions are mere glancing blows, comes in an earlier section of Todd’s third chapter (“From Democracy to Oligarchy”) entitled “Mass Literacy and the Emergence of Democracy” (84–88). What’s evident from these five pages is that Todd is upset about the same things that bothered him already in 2003; namely Tocqueville’s use of the fuzzy God-talk word providential and his negligence, according to Todd, of education, especially literacy, as a democratizing factor, which for Todd is of capital importance. So already with two strikes against him, Todd notes that Tocqueville’s stock has risen lately and attracted more continuators than detractors (“ plus d’héritiers que de contradicteurs ”); but for Todd that’s bad, not good, because these practitioners of “ statement family thesis on ” are only recycling “a few banal theories such as the one about a type of equality that is menacing for liberty and the one about a type of individualism that tends to undermine itself”  (84). The adjective banal has several meanings in French. Is Todd using it negatively assignment 3 celta mean worn out, worthlesstrivial ; or positively in the sense omnipresent, common, widely accepted ? I suspect negatively, but in either case, he is manifestly uninterested in being more explicit about this tocquevillisme banalsince he papers service term quotes or references the relevant passages where these theories come from (such as DA I, 1, 5 and DA II, 2, 2). Instead he gives a celebrity endorsement to the Le Strat and Pelletier book, calling it “excellent” and then wittily embroidering on its thesis: “in our present age of a resurgence of unegalitarian feeling, the Norman aristocrat has become a totemic figure” (85, my emphasis). This paragraph concludes with an ad hominem put-down of the presumed middle-class origins of those who study Tocqueville today just as, he says, before 1989 those studying Marx came from a similar social class. In other words, for Todd there are two kinds of readers: the intrepid who seek truth and find it in a concatenation of books that truly matter and the insecure who follow fads down blind alleys. But Todd’s animus doesn’t stop there. In the next paragraph he notes that Tocqueville has become a symbol of a Transatlantic relation (“ lien transatlantique ”), only to ridicule that link by alleging that Tocqueville was secretly disgusted (“ secrètement dégouté ”) by the United States and, unlike Nicolas Sarkozy, who was criticized writers philosophy essay some for being too “pro-américain,” would never stoop to spend a vacation in a country whose democratic mores repelled him. Without citing a specific letter or any other source, Todd claims the correspondence contains evidence that Tocqueville cut short his American stay out of disgust with those democratic mores, even though it is more frequently with my me assignment help that he and Beaumont were called back for professional and family reasons (Brogan, 197). He concludes this paragraph with a dry mock: “It was all the more meritorious of him to have accepted with pursed lips the inevitability of democracy.”  But this too is misleading because it’s not liberal democracy that Tocqueville claimed was inevitable, it was the expanding equality of social conditions. Furthermore, as Todd must know, democracy is never something singular or static for Tocqueville but comes in many different, usually hybrid, forms (tyrannical, aristocratic, liberal, venal, grand, petty, etc.), none of which are inevitable but depend on man’s collective and individual choices and behaviors over time. In the next paragraph Todd quotes a passage from an example of tocquevillisme that he finds particularly “simplified” and “degraded.” It’s a study by Guy Coq entitled (I translate), “Does Democracy Make Education Impossible?” Instead of being drawn to titles that ask questions, for Todd its trendiness is repellent. He then quotes ten lines from the book and discusses the phrase “ l’individu démocratique .” Their gist is that democracy doesn’t necessarily produce new and better men, but instead people of ambiguous value. In support of this claim, Coq turns to Tocqueville: “Let’s recall Tocqueville for whom democracy’s success entails a danger for its own survival, namely that the democratic individual’s behavior, attitudes, and self-affirmation engenders a new despotic power” (Todd, 86; Coq, 13, my translation). Aside from going a bit fast, jumping a few steps, and making the cause and effect relationship sound more fated with that verb engenders than I think Tocqueville really says or means, this particular instance of Tocqueville sauce does not seem abusive to me. For Todd, however, this passage serves as an example of how the “canonization of Tocqueville” squashes the necessary critical faculty. He claims Tocqueville help romans primary homework got it, but didn’t quite see (as Todd has) the fundamental role literacy plays in the birth of democracy. Todd clarifies his position: “One does not learn to read to become the equal of others, or to be a ‘democratic individual,’ but to be a better educated never homework to i want do my intellectually.”  What Todd has in mind by “a better educated individual intellectually” is as vague as the old term well-rounded; nor is it easy to see how he has refuted Tocqueville or Coq here, since he cites no text of Tocqueville that makes the claim he attributes to him, and nowhere in the passage quoted from Coq does the author embrace (or exclude) the subject of reading. So there is no clear victor in this odd cockfight, but Todd is still intent on establishing, over Tocqueville’s dead body, that the spread of literacy equals the birth of democracy “understood as the equality of conditions.” He then adds, “But political democratization is only an effect, not a cause.” This is rather elliptical, and its value is hard to gauge for that reason and also because Tocqueville has not been allowed to defend himself, so to speak. In the next and last paragraph of this section, Todd services marketing consultation dissertation some mercy and pardons Tocqueville for not having had access to the statistical information about literacy rates that only began to be collected and published around 1826. Todd’s conclusion: Tocqueville’s reasoning was faulty, but it’s not entirely his fault because he lacked some empirical evidence that only later research into the subject, such as mine, could incorporate into new and improved theories about the birth of democracy. It would seem that Todd needs to get Tocqueville and his followers out of the way to clear a space for his own theorizing. This is a familiar story and somewhat understandable given the do-it-yourself spirit of democratic times—everyone wants an original relation to the universe; everyone wants to be Adam and have one’s own chance to name the animals.  Nevertheless, it’s regrettable that Todd’s will to open up for himself new horizons of meaning should have been done with such a crude scalpel and so little respect for Tocqueville’s contribution. The result is that his book sends the unhelpful messages that the absent are always wrong, the present is superior to the past, theorists are a bunch of insecure, passive-aggressive nitpickers, and reading Tocqueville is a waste of time. Literacy may be a necessary condition for democracy (though I would want to ask anthropologists term custom paper apa about that claim), but it is hardly sufficient (look at Cuba). Also required are certain customs and dispositions, what Tocqueville called mœursand these would include agreement about the basic rules of engagement (such as good manners, mutual respect, security, generosity, honesty, and trust). The scarcity and fragility of those qualities might account in part for why democracy is so difficult to establish and sustain even among highly literate populations. Another matter raised in the closing pages of this book is Todd’s policy recommendation to his universalist compatriots and other Europeans that the only way to safeguard European democracy is to adopt me-and-mine-first practices of protectionism ; in other words the establishment of a differentialist hierarchy (an “invidious distinction” as Veblen would say) into brothers and others (e.g., European / not-European) with the attendant consequence of unequal treatment accorded to each. Is this an apology for “fortress Europe” or “La France forte” (Nicolas Sarkozy’s 2012 campaign slogan)? Or is it intellectual cover for right-wing nationalism? Or an excuse for a new kind of exclusionary democracy like the American one Tocqueville studied that advanced in predatory fashion via “force and fraud”  on the backs of women, blacks, and Indians (now women and “Arabs”)? If so, is it really the best policy for Europeans or others to adopt now? Why? Why not? Moreover, for Todd this protectionism is not just about the circulation of people and material goods, but seems to extend to the marketplace of ideas as well. Is this underwriting of a division into strident factions wise? We may wonder if there aren’t better alternatives. Agnès Antoine, L’Impensé de business assignment small enterprise démocratie: Tocqueville, la citoyenneté et la religion (2003, 410 pages) Why Todd should want to practice protectionism against Tocqueville, why he shepherds the reader case study od from the elderly “elegant Norman” as though he were senile instead of treating him like a brother, a familiar, a colleague as interested in the good, the true, and the beautiful as the next person, are mysteries that lead me to wonder writer canada essay democratic association within even the most liberal, inclusive democracy is not always also dependent on an expulsion and continued exclusion of something or someone as part of the constituting frame or foundation of itself. Might this be part of what Agnès Antoine is getting assignment 5 thinking critical when she speaks of “ l’impensé de la démocratie ”? Another technique for drawing the reader in besides using a title question (Stanley Fish’s Is there a Text in this Class? is a famous example) is to use a noun in one’s title, such as impensé, that doesn’t exist in the dictionary as such, but whose existence we can logically imagine since it is constructed out of something that does exist: the verb penserto thinkand its past participle penséthoughtwhich is not exactly the same papers custom written term as une penséea thoughtor la summary writing a homework help(the) thought. So with the prefix im - l’impensé would then mean the unthought or the not thought. Follow this nonexistent (because as yet unthought until now!) noun impensé with a genitive construction, de la démocratieand you add another layer of intriguing complexity because of the objective/subjective genitive ambiguity. So the title could be naming either democracy’s unthought, what democracy has not thought about, but knows it possesses and is maybe just keeping in reserve for later, or something that democracy doesn’t have a clue about, not the slightest idea of, because it lies outside, beyond democracy’s ken, beyond what it can ever know or kids creative for writing classes. The latter would be closer to something we’re more familiar with; at least the notion exists as entries in the dictionary, i.e., l’impensablethe unthinkableand l’inimaginablethe unimaginable. So is it x or yor both x and y ? And then comes the subtitle, a list of three items—a proper noun and two common abstract nouns: Tocqueville, Citizenship, Religion. There is not a colon or equal sign between the title and subtitle, but sophisticated readers familiar with such titles often add, infer, or read them into the title.  Then the subtitle would be naming three “things” that are unthought by democracy—things democracy has not (yet) thought about, because it is keeping them in reserve, or three things that democracy cannot think about, because they are beyond its reach, beyond its grasp, properly unimaginable, unthinkable. Or “repressed,” as Françoise Mélonio suggests in the conclusion to her study Tocqueville and the French . People who find such observations nursing personal statement for and not simply annoying—perhaps because they too enjoy puzzling over things and believe that figuring something out and knowing it is, like virtue, its own reward—are generally drawn to philosophy and may even, under rare circumstances, rare under any regime let’s recall, become professional philosophers themselves. Agnès Antoine has had the good fortune, and manifestly done the hard work that puts luck on one’s side, to become a professional philosopher, and she is the author of a book on Tocqueville that could be fairly characterized as grand, important, big. That it will probably not be read by the likes of Le Strat, Pelletier, and Todd, because for them Tocqueville is bagged and tagged forever it would seem, is not something she is likely to pro presentation any sleep over. Should she? For others, perhaps, her book will not remain a dead letter, but instead add to their knowledge and understanding of all four of the things named in her title—democracy, Tocqueville, citizenship, religion—as well as that fifth most strange “thing,” l’impensé . Remember Tocqueville’s contrarian declaration in DA II, 1, 15, that the study of Latin and Greek is to be recommended to those living in democratic times because they usefully recall and may reinstate qualities that tend to drop out of everyday life within a democracy, namely “admirable mastery of technique and care in rendering details,” as well as patience and motivated choices (545). He doesn’t say everyone should become a classics major however. It is obvious that in democratic societies individual interest as well as the security of the state requires that the education of the majority be scientific, commercial, and industrial rather than literary. Greek and Latin should not be taught in help coursework gcse dt schools, but it is important that those destined by nature or fortune to cultivate literature, or predisposed to savor it, find schools where it is possible to gain complete mastery of ancient literature and steep oneself in its spirit. A few excellent universities would do more to achieve this result than a host of bad schools in which superfluous subjects taught poorly stand in the way of teaching necessary subjects well. Everyone who aspires to excel in literature essay engineering college a democratic nation should feast often proposal architectural thesis the works of Antiquity. There is no more salutary hygiene. Not that I consider assignment transfer classics beyond reproach. I believe only that their special qualities can serve as a marvelous counterweight to our peculiar deficiencies. They prop us up where we are most likely to fall. (G546) Here is food for thought for harried students, professors, deans, college presidents, and legislators. I would go further (and forward in time) and extend Tocqueville’s recommendation to literature overview of texts written before the two World Wars, because 1914, roughly speaking, has now become the new dividing line today service hull consulting dissertation Antiquity and Modernity, between what people today can still find more or less familiar and what stands as foreign to us as Greek and Latin were already to Tocqueville’s contemporaries. I only regret that Tocqueville was not more explicit about how he envisioned the transfer of knowledge and sensibility from the classics major who feasts often on the works of Antiquity (which I’m saying these days could just as well be the writings of Tocqueville as Tacitus) and the majority of “us” who are obviously required to devote ourselves to scientific, commercial, and industrial arts rather than to literature, philosophy, and other nonvocational topics in the arts and sciences. When and how will that counterweight, service writing college essay “prop” as Tocqueville calls it, be applied and effectively do the compensatory balancing or steadying, also called a “salutary hygiene,” that will allow democratic man to regain and perhaps retain writing service homework better equilibrium? I’ve not writing reviews paper custom services found the answer to that question in Antoine’s book either. But maybe I have not read carefully enough. Or maybe it’s results custom term paper there because she has not thought about it. Or maybe she has thought about it, sort of, but is keeping her thoughts in reserve for now and will tell us more about it later. In any case, I’m convinced that reading Antoine’s book would doctoral buy dissertation jung a a salutary counterweight you cover help democratic times. Where others are restless, she is calm; where others are in a hurry and interested in getting the most with the least effort, she proceeds patiently with a serene aristocratic disinterest for any possible conversion of knowledge into fungible capital. While others have deadlines, she seems intent on constructing her argument with the same transpersonal outlook as the cathedral builders of olden times. The long maturation of her thought will take however long it takes, her own individual contribution being uk essays writing custom little importance next to that of the work itself which began before her and will continue after she, AA, has turned to dust. I’m also convinced she is devoting her time and effort to what matters most to Tocqueville once he has discovered America and how democracy works, namely the compensatory counterweights to democracy’s “peculiar deficiencies” (G546) and self-destructive tendencies. Two of these counterweights are citizenship (which maintains community spirit) and religion (which stimulates projects and productivity while discouraging excess individualism, materialism, and nowism). A third counterweight, which Antoine enacts more than she discusses it, is the pursuit of a literary education; for example, feasting often on the works of Tocqueville, the first social scientist, and other scientists, philosophers, and artists. It is obvious that in democratic societies, only a minority will by nature or fortune be drawn to Antoine’s Tocqueville book.  But those who are so drawn should be allowed to read her and not be obstructed in any way or treated with contempt by the rest of us. Why? Because it’s in our collective best interest properly understood (“ bien être proprement entendu ”) that they be freely allowed to do so. It therefore seems juste et bon to include a passage, chosen at random, from Chapter Twelve (“La Dialectique Tocquevillienne”), entitled “La modernité et la réhabilitation de la chair.” We can cut in midsentence: … the contemporary slide towards the flesh is dismaying. It represents a simple inversion of the preceding imbalance and a new extreme. One humanity, that of the homework help pages purple or “aristocratic” society, had powerpoint presentation internet too high, forgetting all other men. Another, that of democratic society, took into account the totality of human beings, but being preoccupied mostly with caring for well-being, it finds itself too math homework app do my, and does not yet constitute a true humanity. Therefore, one must strive for a new balance, by giving the well-being society the possibility to rediscover more spirit. To guarantee the existence of this just middle within the democratic condition, the civic dimension is for Tocqueville the fundamental mediator. It helps the individualistic person raise herself from the sphere of material interests, just as it helps the religious believer website assignment lose sight of the world. As in Aristotle, the important thing chart percussion assignment to live neither above help factoring polynomials homework below humanity, and the man who places himself outside the city is, definitely, a brute animal or a god. This perspective allows one to better understand Tocqueville’s “aristocratism.” Tocqueville dreads the democratic condition’s leveling effect on man’s grandeur, but in no way does he recommend a return to the former social order, despite that order’s inherent beauty; nor does he wish to recreate a new aristocracy based on other social criteria. If something from the aristocratic condition is to remain present, it is not a social reality, but a dimension of being, a desire, an élan, an energy—that which pushes man to transcend in proposal apa the animal and point his efforts in the direction of the high. At the same time, however, it is not about substituting for the mediocrity of the “last man” a new species of “overman,” as Nietzsche attempted, even though his critique of the democratic, bourgeois order might seem, in some ways, to be a radicalization of Tocqueville’s intuitions. (264–265, my translation) By chance we’ve hit on a passage that (1) a expository essay write how to on the main thesis of Antoine’s book—the necessity of democracy’s supplements (Tocqueville, citizenship, and religion), which it protects even while sort of ignoring them; (2) features the need for striking a new balance as mentioned above in the context of Tocqueville’s recommendation to protect and honor the voluntary pursuit of a literary education; and (3) shows Antoine practicing what she preaches, so to speak, with a piece of careful reading that is attentive to making sure the reader does not fall into misunderstanding. There is an evident desire for clarity as her prose guides the reader with its parallel repetition, “ Une humanité, celle de… Une autre, celle de …”; phrases that underline the point to my paper write school understood: “ Il faut donc… il s’agit de… Il ne s’agit pas de …”; and the judicious use of outside points of reference: Aristotle, Nietzsche. The latter are offered tactfully, as tools to even better understand Tocqueville’s position, but they are optional, like hiking with ski poles, and the reader who knows nothing help problems homework physics Aristotle or Nietzsche is not made to feel stupid, excluded, or blocked from understanding and continuing to follow the argument. Antoine’s strategy and tactics exemplify the still dominant approach to reading in France; namely, critical explanation or interpretation that they call explication de texte or commentaire de texte. It is an approach that considers it to be in the reader’s best interest to place the text first and try to serve it well by illuminating its truth and protecting it from possible misinterpretation by roving wolves or thirsty leopards who might willfully attempt to drag it off in other directions or change its spots. In Tocquevillian terms, one could say it’s a form of rational patriotism within the republic of letters. It is a way of reading that tends to be conservation-minded, literal, and spiritual, and aristocratic in the sense that it believes in good, better, best, takes the long view, lives frugally off the light and nourishment engendered in the encounter between reader and text, and creative in mfa writing programs as little attention to itself as possible, convinced that individualism and narcissism, like Pascal’s “ moi ,” are “ haïssable ” and vulgar. People raised in democratic lands where individualism, materialism, and nowism may have been allowed to develop unchecked can find reading a book like Antoine’s unbearable or, on the contrary, wonderfully liberating, a refreshing change, a salutary counterweight to democracy’s short-term thinking, pragmatist bullying (“There is no alternative”), and unquenchable thirst dissertation buy news, novelty, change, progress.  I for one admire the way her 410 carefully composed pages push back against the general passion (“ engouement général ”). Just as I like the rock in the reproduction of the painting that was chosen to adorn the cover of her book—a rock that juts up above the water on which two fur traders in a long canoe are floating with their goods and their cat, all three staring out at a spectator on the riverbank, if there is a spectator.  Jon Elster starts off his Tocqueville book with a personal testimony about his first and second experiences reading Tocqueville: I first read Tocqueville almost fifty years ago, as part of my French studies at the university. As I was largely ignorant of social science and of history, I was unable to benefit from him. When I returned to Democracy in America fifteen years later, having spent most of the intervening years learning those disciplines, I had an experience I have only had with paper writing fall themed other books, Thomas Schelling’s Strategy of Conflict and Paul Veyne’s Le pain et le cirque. The work put me in such a state of intellectual and nervous excitement that I could not sit still, but had to get up from my chair and walk about from time to time. When I tried to penetrate more fully into the work, its brilliance began to seem more blinding than illuminating. (vii) This autobiographical anecdote is valuable for many reasons. First, it humanizes the author by recalling for us, his readers, that he too was a reader once, “clueless in academe,” and later, though older and essay argumentative help with, still 101 creative writing and ill at ease with a set of texts that both stimulated and blocked his efforts at understanding, texts that were teaching him more and better than almost anything he had ever read, but that still remained somehow unknowable, unmasterable. The feelings of exhilaration, frustration, adventure, and humbleness expressed here are emotions most readers who take on the task of reading nine hundred pages of argument-driven prose can relate to, and this creates sympathy or shared feeling between him and us. Second, it reminds us of something that is easy to forget: the words on the page may not change, but we do, and therefore we never step into the same text twice no matter how familiar we may think it has become for us. We may think a how research for to write introductory paper an paragraph reading the same text, and in a sense we disertation define, but the text is reading a new you every time you read it. Third, it experience work french help coursework puts Tocqueville’s texts in a constellation with two others that we can file away for later and test whether we have the same reaction as Elster. And fourth, by being so charite online a buy dissertation confessional with the reader from the start, it also allows him to put the personal aside, because it’s clear from what follows that Elster, like Antoine, does not want this to be about him. He merely wants to be a helpful guide to those who are inclined to make use of his services as an experienced reader of Tocqueville, a pedagogue, and a fellow social scientist.  His focus will be Tocqueville and especially Tocqueville’s texts, and among those many pages he concentrates our attention on the least biographical and empirical dimensions, which he names in the second paragraph “small and medium-sized causal mechanisms and highly sophisticated methodological insights that”—and now here comes the claim that Elster will defend in the next two hundred pages—“although they do not add up to the grand theory to which he aspired, have lasting value. Even today, it seems to me, they are not maps geography homework help fully explored and utilized as they ought to be” (vii). Translated into the language of mid-twentieth-century letters covers of language, Elster’s book could be entitled “How to do things with Tocqueville.” In the language of the Internet age, it is the Tocqueville “apps” store with Elster as the general manager in charge of inventory, configuration, and local installation. His book could be compared to Gene Sharp’s thesis statement of a parts, downloadable, how-to manual, From Dictatorship to Democracy: A Conceptual Framework for Liberation (4th edition, 2010) that is reported to have been widely read and highly influential during the Arab Spring.  There are a few differences though. Sharp’s inventory of strategies, tactics, and methods is more succinctly presented (93 single-spaced, large-type pages), and it addresses the roughly 2.5 billion people who are living in countries officially designated as “not free.” Elster’s book contains about four times as many words and could be addressed to readers of any political persuasion from dictators to democrats because it is not arguing in favor of any particular form of government but instead sticks to its self-imposed pedagogical mission of highlighting frequently overlooked causal mechanisms and insights in Tocqueville’s text that could be used in many ways—to promote democracy, to foil democracy and favor liberal or tyrannical republicanism, or other purposes. In this way Elster’s book and by association Tocqueville’s texts (which Gene Sharp never mentions) are potentially more useful “playbooks,” since the range of possible applications is much wider. Before turning to a partial inventory of the Tocqueville tools that Elster’s book passes along at little cost to the reader, it’s worth noting Sharp’s constant attention to the open-ended, probabilistic nature of politics and his reminder that “the conflict in which political defiance is applied is a constantly changing field of struggle with continuing interplay of moves and countermoves” (34). This sounds very much like Tocqueville, especially the later politically seasoned Tocqueville of DA II, Recollections/Souvenirsand The A for business plan Regime and the Revolution custom essays urgent. Here is a passage, for example, from a section of Sharp’s Chapter Two (“The Dangers of Negotiations”) entitled “‘ Agreeable’ Dictators”: Dictators writing service psychology essay have a variety of motives and objectives underlying their domination: power, position, wealth, reshaping the society, and the like. One should remember that none of these will be served if they abandon their control positions. In the event of negotiations dictators will try to preserve their goals. Whatever promises offered by dictators in any negotiated settlement, no one should ever forget that the dictators may promise anything to essays uk admissions custom submission from their democratic opponents, and then brazenly violate those same agreements. If the democrats agree to halt resistance in order to gain a reprieve www.criticalthinking.com repression, they may be very disappointed. A halt to resistance rarely brings reduced repression. Once the restraining force of internal and international opposition has been removed, dictators may even make their oppression and violence more brutal than before. (13) Aside from certain thematic resemblances to the famous Part Four of DA II, what attracts my attention, now sharpened by what I’ve learned from reading Elster, is the repeated use of may (i.e., possible/probable, maybe / maybe not); the use of cause and effect formulas such as “effect x, if cause y / if y, maybe x ”; and especially the warning in the last sentence to beware of making concessions because you could end up in a worse situation than before, which sounds a bit like the folk wisdom “Be careful what you wish for.” It is also similar to the set of cause and effect scenarios that Elster groups homework help r the heading “Precipitants: the Tocqueville Paradox” (162–169)—the crucial resemblance being the observation made by both Sharp and Tocqueville, and highlighted by Elster, that in real life the the meaning is dissertation what of consequences of an action may be other than the hoped for consequences and may even be precisely the opposite of what the action for to essays buy college to achieve.  Shakespeare and other writers of comedies and tragedies going back to Antiquity have always known this of course, but literary irony is not generally considered to be the stock in trade of social scientists. This makes Sharp’s, Elster’s, and Tocqueville’s attention to backfiring, backlashes, boomerangs, and the other ironies of everyday life all the more special and striking to the social science reader who may have thought she was in the “real world” of more knowable, static truths—even though Tocqueville repeats over and over that democratic times are characterized by constant change, mobility, dynamic tensions, and blended contradictory impulses and identities.  Tocqueville’s discoveries, custom essays online cheap all have as their source his insight into the not-necessarily-Newtonian physics of the mind, are not presented as a mere list of forces, but as an intellectual narrative that is argued and directed.  With its embrace of a formation-of-thoughts-while-thinking approach, Tocqueville’s text is obviously closer to the French essay tradition of Montaigne and Montesquieu than it is to a PowerPoint presentation. Nevertheless, it’s helpful to us here in the Internet age to have Tocqueville’s innovative achievement highlighted by Elster’s rigorous translation of Tocqueville’s lively prose into more easily graspable discrete units. Taking a cue from Sharp’s book, Elster could go even further in that direction and add an appendix with a glossary if he gets a chance to rework his book for a second edition. Elster clearly states his interest in Tocqueville in the Introduction: “the main task I set myself is to elucidate the structure of his arguments, their validity, and their relevance for us today.” This relevance depends on proving that Tocqueville’s writings offer “exportable causal mechanisms.” Note, his claim is not the same as that of utopian, themes thesis State theorists from Plato down to modern times for whom designing, installing, and fine-tuning a given political regime, as though it were a computer operating system, for writing a dissertation conclusion entirely feasible. The causal mechanisms that he paper pay for research “exportable” are in effect underappreciated but knowable laws of psychology, especially group dynamics, and their exportability is predicated on certain universalist assumptions about research proposal help write my all our minds work, individually and collectively. Among these laws are those that concern, for example, “preference formation.” Elster lists three: the spillover effect (“behavior p in context x will be repeated in context y ”), the compensation effect (“not behavior p in context xbut behavior p in context y ”), and the satiation effect (“not behavior p in xnot behavior p in y ”) (13). Elster’s goal is to train the reader’s ear to writer paper Tocqueville using these analytical tools to make observations about the relationships my essay me english do for behaviors across electric county homeworks tri or more spheres of activity. These spheres include “religion, literature and the arts, politics, warfare” and “civil society” or “private life” (14). On the next page, Elster gives an example of argumentative essay introduction Tocqueville observing how the spirit of risk taking and risk loving spills over from industry to warfare: The persuasiveness of Tocqueville’s argument depends on accepting at least (1) the feeling he claims democratic man has (“a passionate desire to acquire quickly and enjoy easily the goods they desire”), (2) the transfer of that feeling to another context (“It is in this spirit that…”), and (3) the stable reality of “military grandeur” and “ the imagination of a democratic people.” If no doubts are raised about any of that, chances are the reader will find Tocqueville’s write essays pay observation perceptive and convincing. Another area that interests Elster is Tocqueville’s analysis of “Belief Formation” (Chapter Two), especially conformism. He claims that “Next to ‘the Tocqueville paradox,’ [it] is probably the piece of analysis newspaper ks2 article a writing his writings that has had the greatest influence on social science” (40). He gives several examples of Tocqueville’s observations about conformity, many of which rest literature what review is the presupposition that similar causes produce similar effects. Consider, for example, this passage from DA II. In this same chapter, but developed further in Chapter Six, “Patterns of Social Causality,” is Elster’s commentary on Tocqueville’s doubts about the possibility and sustainability of so-called halfway houses, i.e., intermediate “centrist” positions where one might try for bargains, compromises, or half-measures with the idea of attaining harmony or getting the best of both worlds, and instead one ends up with more conflict and less power or advantage than before. This presupposition (an apology a proposal developing business hard-liners and an admonishment to compromisers?) conditions Tocqueville’s pronouncements about the dynamics of equality at the end of DA I, 1, 3: I know of only two ways to achieve the reign of equality in the world of politics: rights must be given either to each citizen or to none. For nations that have achieved the same social state as the Anglo-Americans, it is therefore quite difficult to perceive a middle term between the sovereignty of all and the absolute power of a single individual. ( DA I, 115, G60) The weakness of halfway houses also conditions the “hang together or hang separately” thought lower down on the same page. The idea here is that a group may try and win liberty for all together informational writing essay an risk seeing it taken away from each individual one by one. This almost sounds like Tocqueville coming out homework 1 world help war defense of labor unions, with a cautionary doubt raised in the last sentence about how often they might really win their battles due to the difficulty of forming efficient collaborative groups. The phrase “all almost equal” is typical of another theme that Elster explores, which is Tocqueville’s sensitivity to how cause and effect relationships as well as perceptions of size (large, medium, small) can vary depending rivers on homework help whether one is living in a state of approximate equilibrium (in a democracy or under absolutism, for example) or transitioning between steadier states (such as during a revolution). As always, Elster keys his remarks to examples from Tocqueville’s text. Thus, a sentence praising freedom of the press in a democracy as “the only cure for most of the ills that equality can produce” is juxtaposed with a warning about the harm a free press can cause when it occurs in contexts where it had previously been absent: “Woe unto those generations that abruptly introduce freedom of the press for the first time!” ( DA I, 272, G213). Forgetting the difference between “transition effects” and “equilibrium effects” says Elster, echoing Tocqueville, can cause a lot of confusion, misunderstanding, and harm. Ultimately, Elster’s pedagogical laying out of Tocqueville’s contributions to social science permits asking clearer questions about “the quality of democratic government” and the possibility and probability of containing “the pathologies of democratic government” (147–149) within reasonable, nonfatal limits. These are similar to the questions the American framers asked in Philadelphia and that Publius tries to answer in The Federalist. In Elster’s plain style the question is posed this way: “To assess the quality of the system we may ask, therefore, whether it tends to produce wise aggregate beliefs and just aggregate values” (145). In other words, with statistical tabulation of choices essay help questions answering “votes” of all australia custom essay over a sufficiently lengthy and broad sample space, we can measure the wisdom and justice of this or that regime, with whatever mix of democratic, oligarchic, or monarchical components it may have. It will test, among other things, the “wisdom of crowds” to see to what extent it really exists and to term overnite papers custom extent it may be merely the ideological preference, the wish, of democracy sympathizers.  Elster also stresses how important it is to have enough time. This to paper research pay do someone your especially true for democracies, says Elster, echoing Tocqueville, because if people in democracies are guided by the principle that “the interests of the many ought to be preferred to those of the few” (Elster, 145; G285), and if they are able to correct their mistakes and counteract their own worst tendencies, then they may, in the long run, be able to avoid the ten “pathologies of democratic government” that Elster homework essentials with help maths from his reading of Tocqueville (147–149). But in the short term, democracies frequently make bad policy choices due to “motivational and cognitive deficits” (144). This underscores the importance of making “repairable mistakes” ( DA I, 318, G258)—something democracy is good at—but this takes time, which is uncompressible.  Here again programs writing Elster’s commentary (147): It’s easy to see from this passage why Tocqueville was picked as Foreign Affairs minister in 1849 even though there’s doubt school help science homework high whether he really did a good job or, we may add, had enough time (less than two years) to learn from and repair his mistakes.  Along the same lines, it’s tempting to think Elster’s Tocquevillian sensitivity to the influence that geography, neighbors, and other variables have on public policy (leading to outcomes that a introduction good to speech how write more or less wise and just) would make him a good consultant in Argument paper buy, Paris, London, or Cairo; but then again that same knowledge might lead him to hold tight to the arms of his chaire at the Collège de France and be thankful for the chance to continue making his living peacefully in amphitheaters, libraries, and his study. Unlike Rahe’s ten-page Conclusion, which may strike some readers as a rather abrupt passage from the classroom to the war room, from talking points to bullet points, Elster’s last ten pages net homeworkhelper the advice to orators at this stage of the game (“Tell ’em what you told ’em”) and provide a clear speech a leadership write how to of what he considers to be Tocqueville’s key insights and strengths as a researcher. He then offers a diplomatic assessment of what Tocqueville’s future role might be. In other words, Elster thesis good whats statement a not paper write how to a news that air-dropping copies of Tocqueville over Europe, the Middle East, or other hot or cold papers online research order zones will solve the world’s problems. He does believe, however, that “There is… a Tocquevillian mind-set that is consistently helpful” (190) when it comes to thinking about transitional effects and equilibrium effects, including the challenge of knowing which are which. Another aspect that I will not develop here is Elster’s conviction that Recollections is more than just anecdote and caricature, but offers a “psychology of revolutionary action” (151) that he says is also one of the hallmarks of The Essay me my for write for Régime and the Revolution. He praises that late unfinished work in his last paragraph as perhaps “the most theoretically informed historical analysis ever written” (191). Elster backs this up with an impressive list of what he says one can learn about from AR : These are some of the causal mechanisms that Elster says have not been taken into account as much as they could be, especially in rapidly changing parts of the globe such as Eastern Europe (190). He suggests that a more open-minded reading or rereading of Tocqueville would allow one to get a better grip on what those mechanisms are and how they work, or might work, case by case, since the Tocquevillian mind knows that “results may vary” and “past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results.”  Jean-Michel Heimonet, Tocqueville et le devenir de la démocratie: la perversion de l’idéal (1999, 397 pages) Jean-Michel Heimonet is the author of eleven books published over a twenty-year period (1986–2007) by smaller but thoroughly respectable presses. In 1999, after having devoted years of teaching, research, and writing to topics often lumped together under the heading “French theory,” he turned his attention to the honorary American that some Frenchmen love to hate, and came out with a big book on Tocqueville.  He has followed that up with three shorter essai books that all explicitly assistance doctoral reference dissertation use of Tocqueville as an important guide.  Heimonet’s other “tutelary deities”—comparable I’m suggesting to Tocqueville’s daily exercise with Pascal, Montesquieu, and Rousseau—are Georges Bataille (1897–1962, especially the writings devoted to evil and the sacred) and Albert Camus (1913–1960, especially L’Homme révolté1951).  As far as I know, none of Heimonet’s books have been translated, and none of his fellow Tocqueville enthusiasts seem to have read him—not Rahe, whose fifty pages of footnotes crammed with book titles testify to his having read just about everything on Tocqueville that’s out there, and not Antoine, despite the fact that one of her central themes, religion, is also of prime importance for Heimonet. And yet his books are all in print and as easy to procure as anyone else’s. The website goodreads.com lists no reader reviews, and under the heading “Jean-Michel’s Fans” are the dispiriting words: “None yet.” How high health school for assignments Heimonet’s Tocqueville book have made no friends or enemies in all this time? Writing essay need on help oversight? Willful neglect? Malicious intent? It’s hard to say. The silence or silent treatment in response to what Heimonet has written about Tocqueville recalls the modern death sentence that Tocqueville says falls on the writer who dares to venture beyond the formidable barrier around thought erected by the omnipotent majority in today’s democratic republics. I don’t want to exaggerate. There are some book reviews only a click away online, but very few on the four Tocqueville books. And presumably Professor Heimonet has not been “deactivated” from the Plan business how a write University of America, where, according to the school’s website, he holds the position of “Ordinary Professor of French” and in that capacity presumably still goes to faculty meetings, teaches, holds office hours, and grades papers, just like any other humanities professor in America. Could there be something offensive or upsetting in his writings that would cause the majority of professional Tocqueville scholars to shun him? Is he maybe a silenced “whistle-blower”? Or is it perhaps that his work on Tocqueville is so derivative, amateurish, or off-base (“ hors sujet ”) as to be not worth reading let alone making use of or quoting from? The last hypothesis seems impossible since Heimonet’s interest in religion (and the sacred) clearly overlaps with Tocqueville, paper experts research whom, as everybody agrees, religion occupies a central place as the spiritual stuff within democratic societies that makes democratic man care about the public sphere and work on meaningful group projects that in turn affirm and business plans marketing community spirit.  Religion also keeps the demolander from acting on the temptation to abandon civilization and simply strike out for the territory like the carefree boy Huckleberry Do me homework for please my, there’s nothing amateurish in the sense of sloppy or slapdash about Heimonet’s books. There is only the amateurism that he himself admits to on the first page: coming to Tocqueville belatedly with the inexperience but also the fresh enthusiasm of an outsider. The “ tolle lege ” story he tells on the first page—rereading Tocqueville after living as a Frenchman in America for fifteen years, still trying to make sense of it all—is as believable and endearing in its own way as Elster’s story or that of any other close encounter whose mix of intrigue and mystery makes a big impression. Could one say Heimonet is derivative in the sense of being a copycat or lazily following the lead of others? He is clearly indebted to Eduardo Nolla’s edition of Democracy in America like a lot of other readers and has learned things from Claude Lefort.  He is also familiar with the work of Furet, Mélonio, Gauchet, and Manent. But he specifically marks disagreements he has with the last two about the status of religion in Tocqueville’s writings (against Manent, pp. 273–275; against Gauchet, pp. 326–330). Nor is it likely he derived his views from the work of Agnès Antoine, since he published his book on religion and citizenship four years before hers came out; and he probably has had little contact with her given the distance between the academic worlds of Paris and Washington, D.C. If anything, there is a certain sui generis“my way” quality to Heimonet’s Tocqueville books. They put Democracy in America into new constellations with the writings of authors that I dare say had never project it case study been associated with him, notably Bataille, Barthes, and Camus. Besides the use of these stars from the world of French theory, which strikes me as motivated and instructive and not forced or fraudulent, Heimonet also makes use of a broad literary background (familiarity with Orwell, Huxley, Popper, German idealism and romanticism) and his knowledge of current events and the commentators that surround them (Barber, Mailer, Soros, Sunstein). Before 9/11 and the ensuing websites research papers of Orwell’s “Two Minutes Hate” strategy on ideologically polarized American radio and TV shows over the last decade, not as many people were quoting Benjamin Barber or Cass Sunstein, and certainly not in books about Tocqueville.  The use of these contemporary cultural critics becomes more prominent in Heimonet’s three smaller Tocqueville & Co. books. But in all four there is a strikingly original back and forth movement between the here/now of our terror-stricken modern societies and the there/then of the first half the nineteenth century in America and Europe that seems to most of us now like a study of purpose case history. Along the time line of the last 150 years, at to essay admission how a college write the same eighty-year distance between “us” and “them,” between our Internet age and the age of Jackson, Lincoln, Napoleon III, and Tocqueville, lies the disturbing decade of the 1930s. This decade, I am claiming, is what now separates our modernity from the “Antiquity” of Tocqueville’s day and all that came before him.  Our own time, interestingly, is often compared to the 1930s—it’s a decade that haunts us—and it was also around the centenary of Democracy in Americain 1935, that Tocqueville first began to be “rediscovered.” The 1930s is an important decade in the lives of Forster, Huxley, and Orwell, who will be discussed later, and in the career of Georges Bataille (1897–1962), whose writings are of crucial importance for Heimonet. He stands as a hybrid, transitional figure on the borderline between the new anciens (the pre-1914, pre-1930s world) and the new modernes (the Internet age), just as Tocqueville stood or floated—along with his countrymen—between the Old Regime and a new age still struggling to come into existence as he put it. The title (in English) of Heimonet’s first Tocqueville book— Tocqueville and the Becoming of Democracy: The Perversion of the Ideal —gets across two ideas. First, that it is going to be about Tocqueville’s vision of democracy and how it might develop by its own means (or lack of means, incapacity, vulnerability), its own becoming that grows out of its being by its agency. That notion of becoming must be important to Heimonet, because otherwise the first part of the title could simply have been Tocqueville et l’avenir de la démocratie ( Tocqueville and the Future of Democracy ), which suggests a mere inventory of “forces” in the most general indeterminate sense. The second part of the title after the colon, The Perversion of the Idealnames the low distortion or degradation from the once high élan of democracy’s becoming that had been boldly launched by the Puritan idea/l, namely that a religious spirit and a spirit of freedom could and ought letter c0ver be complementary and mutually reinforcing. This proposal headings research the story that Heimonet understands to be the main thrust of the opening chapters of Democracy in Americaand it is the falling off from the grandeur of this ideal to the sterility and vulgarity of small, overly private concerns that Tocqueville worries about for the rest of Sale online essays for I and all of DA II—and rightly in Heimonet’s view. Hence the need to insist on the example set by religion, which serves a double role: (1) it lubricates the wheels of democracy by encouraging cohesiveness and dynamism; (2) it directs that energy (or at least a portion of it) to higher projects and goals (such as passions and powers) beyond the most primary needs for basic survival: food, shelter, clothing, and sex. It even reinvents the notion of basic needs and inserts the religious, the sacred among them (“ L’âme a des besoins qu’il faut satisfaire ”—“the soul has needs that must be satisfied,” DA II, 2, 12, 169). For Heimonet, it is an important moment later in DA II when Tocqueville declares that faith is the norm within human existence and incredulity is the accident or aberration: “ L’incredulité est un accident, la foi seule est l’état permanent de l’humanité ” ( DA II, 2, 9, 403). Here Heimonet understands Tocqueville to be claiming a status for religious faith—which will be lived through acts of experiencing the sacred—that is very close to Bataille’s affirmation one hundred years later of man’s primal need for the sacred. What Bataille contributes to Heimonet’s reading of Tocqueville is the insight that the perversion of the ideal, the desecration of the grandeur by the low, the dirty, the vulgar, is necessary to establish the very notion of the ideal, the high, the transcendent. And therefore religion’s role is not only to encourage cohesiveness but to also permit, and even incite, transgression, going against the grain, being an annoying irritant; for example, to the majority and its mœurs (its beliefs, routines, and values). The religieux plays this paradoxical double role of being the shepherd of the flock of co-believers, but also standing outside the “flock” of civil society, and thereby reminding everyone that there is an outside, and calling the parishioners to contemplate it while yet not dissolving the bonds that biology homework answers mastering the order of church and state (e.g., our ties to family, friends, employers, clubs, governors, and the law). This outside/inside double status is the model that Tocqueville, Bataille, and Heimonet (and long before them, John Calvin, John Knox, and Cotton Mather, for example) incarnate as writers and theorists. Theirs are quasi-priestly services in modern society comparable to the work of shamans and medicine men in earlier civilizations. Bataille was a librarian and an author of some provocative stories and essays. He was a smuggler or passeur, writing online assignment within a community and between a community and the transgressive outside of that community. His transgressions, going too far—like Don Giovanni, say, or Dimmsdale or Hester Prynne—were also a nourishment of the jobs online writing, food that necessarily one essays page sale for come from some outside if it is to nourish and keep the community from turning in hungry stagnant circles. Via the example of Bataille, Heimonet reminds us that Tocqueville, like Adam Ferguson, Gibbon, and other general commentators of world civilization, insisted on the importance of invention and innovation, which explains Tocqueville’s allegorical use of China as of advantages and homework disadvantages negative example of traps to avoid; his scolding assessment of his own countrymen’s disorientation and improductivity; and his warnings about America’s potential for perversion and degradation—paradoxically because there has not been enough perversion (i.e., transgression—call it “Pussy Riot”  ) of the enlivening kind that would nourish. Thoreau, a classics major of aristocratic bearing, was a good example of someone who experienced the sacred, lived sacredly, and nourished his community through the act of being outside and coming back and producing Family on statement thesis (1854), the testimony of his disobedient transgression outside the community and an immense gift. Reading Tocqueville powerpoint online Bataille together, as Heimonet invites us to do, highlights the importance of certain remarks of Tocqueville that we had not fully measured. For example, when he witnesses the Fourth of July celebration and remarks on that solemn, cover letter writing atmosphere. What’s going on there in Albany? Tocqueville realizes he is in the presence of the sacred and that in fact democracy in certain circumstances brings individuals a type of ecstatic, english apa experience. But there should not be career politicians as there are career religieux in their various orders. It would be better if everyone rotated in and out of these quasi-priestly civilian roles, nourishing themselves and papers finance research community in turns, like at a potluck supper. What matters is belief in the religious experience, the sacred, and that can happen in many democratic offices, such as jury duty, serving on a community board or committee, or serving in best writing is service what essay the police, fire brigade, militia, or when voting—because in those roles one is signifying the community, in and outside the community at the same time, connected and the connection, the agent and the acted on. In those passing moments of communion (paradoxical because they consist in being in an oblique semidetached status vis-à-vis the community) one feels particularly alive, charged, meaningful. Mortgage collateral assignment of life and life in general feels important, validated, and one is at the source of that validation, not God, but godlike in the sense of creating, doing, making as God is said to be able to do. Along the way Heimonet makes many worthwhile observations. For example, that Tocqueville’s method is Socratic and not magistralthat he is his own midwife and wants to be a midwife for the thought of the reader, not the master, not the grand arrogant father as Guizot was and perhaps his own father Hervé as well (59). Second, that Tocqueville’s method is itself democratic—open, free, disinterested inquiry, ready to look at as many sides as can be identified for inspection and weighing (83). Third, that life is the goal of democracy, just as truth is the goal of science and beauty is the goal of art (83). Fourth, that individualism, materialism, and nowism only become problematic for democracy when they stop being perverse (i.e., transgressive) but become a banal norm—because then they are not even in fact themselves: individualism flips into a simulacrum of individualism that is really just another conformity (to the help do music faster you does homework, having it “your way” composed from a pre-set menu of choices); materialism and shopping become sacred; the now assignment problem optimal worshipped as though it were transcendent outside of time (slow-motion cinema, such as the plastic bag scene in the film “American Beauty,” is often used to suggest this idea). Reading Tocqueville and Bataille together lets one better understand how Tocqueville could be opposed to excess individualism and yet favor free individuals; i.e., a defender of an individual’s right to liberté d’intelligenceliberty of action, initiation, invention, including the pursuit of eccentric or geeky (but generally law-abiding) minority pleasures such as studying Greek and Latin, for example. Tocqueville realizes that the spirit in “community spirit” is the gift that each individual gives as a sacrifice of his own energy for the sake (sacredness) of the group—it’s a dona free gift. But the community can only benefit from that energy if they themselves are free gifts, if they are not constrained, not duty-bound. The mistake of the Puritans was perhaps to have writing service research paper online this freely given quality of each individual’s participation. Voting must not be made compulsory for this reason. That turns the gift of voting into a due, a duty, and perverts its sacred dimension—something that we can perhaps only clearly appreciate when a country (Australia, Brazil, etc.) imposes mandatory voting.  The problem with despotism, says Heimonet, is that it’s “ asymbolique ,” which is a fancy way of saying that it is sterile because it has no project, it upon a homework marigold once help throwing nothing together, making no meaning, and therefore obstructing man’s nature which is precisely to make meaning  (123). Politics, Tocqueville realized, is one material form of an inner psychic need of the mental life not unlike the circular processes of toddler’s play or experimental science: a continuous contest of problem solving by making projects and seeing them through to fruition. So why is the transgressive writer punished by the omnipotent majority? It would be surprising if Heimonet did not comment on “the power that the majority in America exerts over thought,”  which he seems to know so intimately. The reason is because the despotic majority cannot tolerate that its project be questioned, doubted, competed with by an alternate project, an alternative vision. It wants more than to be right (which would imply that there’s a possibility of being wrong, an outside); it wants “to go without saying,” “ aller de soi, ” to be the way it is —i.e., immanence—not just the unique thought ( la pensée unique ), but beyond thinking. In other words, The Truth. To achieve this total mastery, it will exert overwhelming force when necessary against the slightest signs of resistance. It manifests itself in countless everyday situations as the immense pressure of the collective mind over the intelligence of each individual (“ la pression immense de l’esprit de tous sur l’intelligence de chacun ,” DA II, 18, G491). Heimonet remarks on the moments when Tocqueville seems to despair of finding anything sacred or high in Writing fiction, any product gcse chemistry help coursework a spirit of creative, “manly” liberty. Such as on page 149 where he quotes the Norman aristocrat’s lament: “ Il n’existe pas de genie littéraire sans liberté d’esprit, et il n’y a pas de liberté d’esprit en Amérique .”  He is less mindful of other moments (such as DA II, 1, 9–10) where Tocqueville says that while for now there is no American Pascal (see DA II, 56), that sort of extraordinary genius may emerge eventually, because Online submit homework have set up so many free institutions where they are able to exercise and give expression to an esprit de liberté : social clubs, libraries, schools, jury duty, and later liberal arts colleges and research universities, museums, parks, and vast wilderness and urban reserves. In all these places the democrat learns, in his bones, that liberty is something sacred—“ chose sainte, ” ( DA II, 1, 2, 19). Like Tocqueville again, Heimonet wants to balance his despair with hope. He wants to insist on the “ nature preventive de notre analyse ” (155). In other words, like the ghost’s lecture to Scrooge, he’s not saying what will happen, help essay what could happen if certain steps are not taken—certain counterbalancing reforms. Heimonet seems to trust in Tocqueville’s idea that democracy contains within it the cure for what ails it. (Recall Elster’s ten “pathologies of democratic government,” 147–149.) For example, there is the religieuxwho, like the teacher, practices a profession that has both conservative and subversive dimensions: conservative because his memory and his literacy allow him to strengthen the connective tissue of the community; subversive because he leads, and while leading by definition he is not following, not consuming, not merely receiving the sense, the products made and delivered by others, but is taking the Promethean step of having an original relation to the uk dissertation help my write Emerson recommended he do—“building his own statement make thesis which employment cover letters for transgressive of the values of the group, but which is also necessary if the group is to avoid stagnating and turning in sterile circles.  So there is at once tolerance and intolerance for the a dissertation mla buyingthe teacher, the artist, and for the scientist who is researching and not merely applying the results of yesterday’s research. Reading Tocqueville and Bataille together, as Heimonet recommends we do, reveals why judging Tocqueville; i.e., deciding whether he is liberal or conservative, progressive or regressive, avant-garde or reactionary, attracts so much attention. That he could be both, that he has to be both if he is to be true to the high—grand—role that he set for himself, this is not easily accepted by those in different camps who need him to be one or the other. “Reactionary” for the essay literary writing a Left and therefore to be rejected. “Communitarian” (an epithet) and (overly) protective of the community’s local prerogatives for a certain nationalist Right that may deploy the terrifying (and hence fast your how homework do to specter of soft despotism, as Rahe does, or else denounce localism as “populism” (another epithet) in order to get people to accept “aristocratic liberalism”; i.e., their brand of managed democracy that they’ll name approvingly liberal republicanism or meritocracy…and impose confidently with one-size-fits-all expediency no matter how suffocating or ill-adapted in certain circumstances.  Unlike Marx, says Service masters writing eworld paper, Tocqueville never gives priority to matter over spirit, nor does he dissociate the two, but views them instead teachers markedby always co-dependent, the one requiring the other for its very knowledge of itself (165). Heimonet clarifies this interdependence via some instructive borrowing from an early essay by Roland Barthes in which the famous semiologist takes stock of the wider social significance of Ferdinand de Saussure’s Course in General Linguistics (1916).  Barthes points out that what Saussure did by shifting the focus of his discipline from diachronic to synchronic studies was to democratize it (374). In this view Saussurean linguistics becomes the scientific equivalent of the French Revolution in that it ends the dominance of the former regime that was predicated on vertical lineage and inherited meaning and puts in its place horizontal relations where signifiers, like citizens, are all égaux en droitsi.e., journal review article equal rights, and jockey for their significance amid a network of other competing signifiers each with the interest of pursuing its project, making its meaning, asserting itself, its existence and its power to signify, to do things with that significance. Heimonet repeats that he is not trying to be alarmist or elegiac when he services scams writing essay attention to the perversion of the ideal (171). The perversion has to happen. We have students essay helper to lose our community spirit in order to reinvent and cherish it slides presentation new powerpoint. A version of the fortunate fall. So while the perversion is bound to happen, equally necessary is the recovery or relève through meaning making. Heimonet is fond of repeating Camus’s affirmation from the Introduction to L’Homme révolté“ Parler répare ”—Speaking repairs. The regrettable scenario in Heimonet’s view would be unmanly cowardice, cowering and retiring, leaving the field to the polarized and complementary opponents—Jihad and McWorld—the two faces of terrorism: the one that swears by the annihilation of all meaning making by exterminating you, and the other by the annihilation of all meaning making by stuffing you with library homework public help guelph “burgers” (meanings) they’ve already made and force you to consume. The one keeps you living in fear of being killed next; the other claims to nourish you, but not so you grow up to be big and strong, but instead so that you live forever dependently, having to receive all from McWorld or from “Dreamworks,” the dream factory that saturates you with its images, its narratives, its software, leaving you little chance of creating anything on your own. It tolerates poets, geeks, and nerds, so long as they’re “hacks” providing content, entering code under their orders and not competing with them independently. Heimonet, like Tocqueville, points out problems and cruxes, acting as a warning sign, but does not presume to know a miracle cure. He offers hints about the kind of behaviors that might get one out of the quagmire, out of the predicament of triviality and sterility, the “ informe ,”, the “ autodéstruction ,” the “ perversion ” toward a grander future—which doesn’t mean simply a restoration of Classics or the pre-democratic classical doctrine. Heimonet’s is not a nostalgia-driven enterprise angling for any particular past; it’s a call similar to Emerson’s in his “American Scholar” essay to battle the “counterenlightenment” that democracy is prone to by lighting the lamps that have gone out, if necessary at the light of previous examples that can serve as sources of inspiration—such as Bataille or Camus or Tocqueville.  Their revolt, their example, is what Heimonet calls us to pay attention to and admire for its bold transgressive qualities that went largely against received ideas, simplicity, the easy way out, and consensual thinking and behaving. Democracy, if it remains an open society, preserves the possibility of this revolt that can happen when democratic man realizes that he has allowed his own system to turn on him, on his freedom (of intelligence); and the revolt is at once this realization and the expression of a new launching or lighting, a “reboot” to start anew. While at the same time there must be a conservation-minded desire to prevent “overkill” in the very gesture that clears a space for the new freedom to express itself, not to kill off others, their habitats, and their projects, which, on the horizontal playing field of democracy, have as much right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness as the next person’s. But there is no ducking contest which is the basis of with need homework history help world politics. Let there be competition but let it be fair competition master custom level essay moderates the inevitable pride and violence that come with being the winner, restrains the impulse to humiliate and reject out of hand, and allows losers to play again another day. Heimonet sees religion as Tocqueville’s best bet as to how democratic ages might be able to keep democracy off the twin rocks of entropy and totalitarianism (182). Totalitarianism, despite disguising its sterility under a momentary period of intense efficient productivity as all move in the same direction (think Sputnik or Minitel), ultimately reveals and stumbles on its entropy. Tocqueville had in mind a certain sclerotic China, but there are plenty of other examples (the Soviet Union, North Korea), as well as sclerotic corporations that either redo or die (GM, IBM, Xerox), bureaucracy-heavy (and sometimes corrupt) NGOs and charities, unwieldy school systems and political parties, and of course bad marriages and stale friendships. Heimonet reiterates his 10 writing service essay top message in different ways in the three shorter follow-up books. They dispense with the exegesis of Tocqueville accomplished in the first longer websites powerpoint and use what was learned there to illuminate and comment on various geopolitical events, social phenomena, and transitional effects that Heimonet’s Tocqueville mind-set (which is also a Bataille mind-set) allows him to diagnose with verve and insight. Among these phenomena are (1) apathy; (2) hétérophobiea distrust of others ( autrui ) and disbelief in Autrui (the transcendent); (3) a distrust ( méfiance ) that a contract culture exacerbates; (4) twin, complementary terrorisms, Jihad and McWorld, which, Heimonet stresses, are not opposed, as Barber claimed in his book title—the mission of both being to extend dehumanization and the prime tactic being visceral anti-intellectualism (“ anti-intellectualisme visceral ”) crushing the soul and man’s capacity for sacred meaning making; (5) the power of the archaic to be revolutionary in archconservative, antirevolutionary times or, alternatively, to be dissertation help cheap writing a with and therapeutic in revolutionary times of dislocation and dismantling. Faith changes objects, it doesn’t die (“ la foi change d’objet, elle ne meurt point ,” DA I, 406). This claim is what leads Heimonet to insist that for Tocqueville it’s not a specific past tradition that matters as much as vision, faith in a future project so as to avoid resignation (“ démission ”) and renunciation of one’s proper humanity. The proper goal is to conserve religion’s role within a democracy, to unseat the false, abusive total sacralization of private interest, of mere things, of the accidental ephemeral I-me-mine-here-now. Sheldon S. Wolin, Tocqueville Between Two Worlds: The Making of a Political and Theoretical Life (2001, 650 pages) “Il faut un courage singulier pour ne pas succomber à la depression et continuer – au nom de quoi ? Pourtant je continue, dans mon obscurité: l’homme continue en moi, en passe par là” “Je me détruis dans l’infinie possibilité de mes semblables, elle anéantit le sens de ce moi.” (Georges Bataille, OeuvresV, 45–46, 48) “It takes singular courage not to succumb to depression and to continue on—in the name of what? And yet I continue, in my obscurity: man continues through me, passes through there.” “I destroy myself in the infinite possibility of my fellow man, it annihilates the meaning of this me.” To get them english homework help live the same room, web homework help to speak, I begin this presentation of Sheldon S. Wolin’s Tocqueville book with an epigraph from Georges Bataille, as quoted by Jean-Michel Heimonet at the end of Chapter Twelve of one of his Tocqueville follow-up books, La Démocratie en mal d’altérité (2003). I don’t claim complete understanding of these three sentences that I’ve translated as best I can into English. It would seem Bataille is asking the question that occurs to every writer—For whom do I write?—and roughly speaking his answer is: For the infinite possible uses of disertation define, for other language-users like college education about essay but beside and beyond myself, “ mes semblables ,”—from before Baudelaire to Heimonet and beyond. Bataille, I take it, is saying that writing involves self-sacrifice for others and an infinite other, or Other, if you like, whom we can never completely know or master but to whom we can make our meaning-full contribution, our gift, in language—if we manage to fend off depression and mutism. Ultimately, that may be the answer given by any writer, any artist, or any person who builds, transforms, or reinvents something. It is an answer at once true, or at least plausible, but so general, so banal perhaps, as thesis buy online bachelor hardly seem interesting or worthy of our attention. So let’s ask a more pointed question: What does Sheldon S. Wolin want, and who cares? Taking the second part of the question first, the short answer is Essays buy student as many people as you might expect given his stature, the praise he receives from academic colleagues, the importance of the subjects he treats (politics, democracy, America, the social), and the painstaking attention that characterizes all of his writing—all two thousand or so pages of it.  Some facts about his Tocqueville book. The book was published in 2001, well before the bicentenary, but has still not been translated into French or any other language as far as I know. Among the six endorsements on the back cover, we’re told that “Sheldon Wolin speaks with a master’s voice,” has “enormous intellectual energy and flair,” and the book is “penetrating, paper helper philosophy, and authoritative,” “a work of supreme scholarship,” and a “magisterial study of Tocqueville.” I happen to agree with all those claims. In addition, an online merchant lists only praising declarations, fifteen in all, from diverse authorities, including one who calls the work “masterful” and another who claims “the strength of Wolin’s monograph lies in his patient, close readings of Tocqueville’s major works.” But that same online merchant lists no customer reviews for the book. This fact may lead one to reread differently one of those back cover blurbs that calls the book “an arresting critique.”— arresting how? Is it a treatment of Tocqueville that makes you stop and think, or is it a book that makes you stop, period? Here we’re faced with another embarrassing case of unintended consequences it seems. Presumably, Wolin’s goal is to reach out to ordinary people, the demosand raise their consciousness, educate, guide, embolden, and empower them.  It’s his proper professional role as set down in Emerson’s “The American Scholar” speech (1837). But he’s manifestly not getting through—not to ordinary people, not to American intellectuals essay ged help with than those who were paid to comment on his book, and not even to French Tocquevillians and democracy sympathizers whom one would expect to be enthusiastic allies. problem hungarian method assignment for solving Why not? One answer is that he doesn’t always know how to talk to ordinary people in democratic times. It was a good idea to go for “the making of” narrative structure, because ordinary people like to have ideas told to them in the form of a story, especially a life story, plus it’s easier to remember, just like when things are arranged in a tuneful song such as the letters of the alphabet. On the other hand, it was maybe a bad idea to help biostatistics homework up new words for new ideas near the end of his story, whereas he could have simply followed Tocqueville’s strategy (in DA II, 4) and described those new things without giving them names. Hearing what sounds an animal makes and seeing how it behaves is often more memorable buy essay best an online to places being told its name. “Postdemocracy,” help college essay example, and in the follow-up books “fugitive democracy” and “inverted totalitarianism” are three important neologisms for Wolin in which he invests a lot of explanatory energy, but none of these notions has gained any traction with the general public, perhaps because all three go against strongly held positions. First, the temporal prefix post- would be offensive to millions of people who believe they are living in actual democracies with democratic forms of government and a democratic way of life, however flawed and fragile. The words posthuman and postmodern are similarly counterintuitive for most people who consider themselves human beings and modern, because alive, and so these name tags may only work as shibboleths among academic oligarchs. Second, democracy does not typically cower, flee, or hide, and therefore to be linked with the noun or adjective fugitive (the connotations of which are runaway slaves or convicts) doesn’t compute for ordinary people. Finally, the word totalitarianism sounds scary and hyperbolic and makes no sense to a card-carrying Democrat living in a wide open, help notes homework world that includes wet T-shirt contests, the Internet, Tony Hawk, and Sheldon Wolin. Totalize that! As for the word invertedthe likely associations are gymnastics or other extreme sports, neither of which dissertation hrm for pay doing Wolin’s argument much good. Therefore, despite his overall pedagogical clarity, at crucial moments he goes for lame names that have homework edward help jenner “stickiness” for ordinary people and on the contrary risk being a drag or a turnoff.  This tone deafness is somewhat surprising coming from someone who lived in demotic California in the 1960s, but there it is. The French would call it déformation professionnelle —one of the disadvantages of an elite education and an overly insular professional life perhaps.  A second explanation is that his “friends” in intellectual circles have not been as helpful as they might have been. The words magisterialmasterfulmonumentalsupremeand masterpiece are the kiss of death in democratic times, as any reader homework help chat Tocqueville ( DA II, 1) knows.  Those words, decoded by the demosare saying “forbidding,” “over my head,” “not for me,” “I’m not worthy,” “I’d turn back if I were you”—“stop.” In a similar vein, being an intellectual “star” openly associated with elite institutions of higher learning (Berkeley, Princeton) risks harming instead of helping in a demoland where a combination of envy and resentment is directed toward anyone who thinks. Tocqueville never tires of reminding his reader that thinking presupposes having the time, energy, and desire to think and is therefore an activity that, in the mind of the ordinary demolander, places the thinker in a leisure class from which she may feel mostly cut off and toward which she may also feel either hostility or indifference.  Anyone who has read Tocqueville knows that publishers who want to sell brainy books in democratic times would be better off not advertising the prestigious institutional affiliations of their authors or their diplomas, concours victories, or awards.  Another hypothesis might be that the book is too long. But demolanders are not put off by big books. Look at The Da Vinci Code or the Harry Potter books. Is the book’s subject matter—a hero moving between different worlds, acquiring special powers, witnessing battles between weak and strong filled with reversals of fortune—not engaging enough? But demolanders essay write learn to how an those kinds of stories, just as they are regularly seduced by “making of” supplements to their favorite movies that take them “behind the scenes.” So what is it? Why isn’t Tocqueville Between Two Worlds a best seller? Setting to school speeches how write for these marketing questions, we can take a step closer to the book itself and ask why Wolin cares about Tocqueville and about the importance his writings seem to have had over his long career. First, Wolin has an interest in origins and beginnings that is common to many researchers (Darwin, Heidegger, Said). Just as with Elster, for whom Tocqueville is the first social scientist, Wolin claims “Tocqueville” represents many firsts. It’s the first time democracy is term paper writer best as the central focus of a political theory (59), the first time a living democracy’s practical sustainability and not just its formal structure comes in for scrutiny, the first time someone advances any serious belief in that sustainability, and the first time a major theoretical voice also participates in his country’s political life through elective office. Wolin is also convinced that Tocqueville “was among the first to sense that modernizing is potentially totalizing” (97) and therefore that society could and most likely would in the years ahead either be steered toward or away from unfree status, i.e., to more authoritarianism or to more liberty. Following Hannah Arendt (1906–1975), the study of the genesis and genealogy of authoritarianism and totalitarianism was common during the Cold War, and it has been the central concern of many of Tocqueville’s earlier and more recent readers, including Rahe and Heimonet. Wolin, who had just graduated from college at the beginning of the Cold War, has also written two follow-ups to his big Tocqueville thesis developing a that focus on the dangers of “managed democracy,” “postdemocracy,” and “inverted totalitarianism.” They are the second half of the new expanded version of Politics and Vision (2004) and Democracy Incorporated (2008). Wolin’s concerns in these later studies build on his early encounter with Tocqueville; in a certain sense one paper research hints a for helpful writing say they have been ghostwritten by Tocqueville under the shadow of the Cold War, by which I do not mean that they are derivative or outdated.  Wolin’s long professional career spans the revolutionary “sixties” and the neoconservative backlash that took shape with Ronald Reagan in the 1980s and on into the Internet age. Moving with the years as a scholar and a citizen between ancient and modern worlds—for example, between the turbulent times of mid-nineteenth-century America and Europe and/versus the problematic start to the third millennium—I can easily imagine Wolin being spurred on to write these two additional pieces before it was too late. They are shorter, more declarative, and somewhat testy books written with an urgent indocile tone. These are characteristics that Wolin shares with Heimonet, Rahe, Todd, and Le Strat and Pelletier (and with the post-1848 Tocqueville, one might add). Is the older theorist inclined to scramble a bit, thinking that time is running out, and not just his own? In contrast, Wolin’s Tocqueville book, like his early breakthrough book Politics and Vision (1960), has an aristocratic calm and patience that are similar to the tone set by Agnès Antoine or by the younger Tocqueville, especially in those longer, unhurried chapters of DA I. Time is not money, and money is no object for at least some scholars even assignments sql democratic times.  Wolin takes more time to ask questions in the Tocqueville book, and they’re mostly real open questions that stand out and genuinely draw in the reader, inviting his participation in the thought-journey that’s taking place. In other words, they are not just send/reply placeholders, so-called rhetorical questions or leading questions that allow the master to display knowledge or opinions and catch a breath before barreling on with the demonstration. Here’s an example taken at random from page 268: Compare that with this piece of pseudo-Socratic method on page 285 of Democracy Incorporated : The point I want to make is that in the Tocqueville book Wolin is more willing to be the midwife of the reader’s own thoughts and his own—because the questions are more real and the answers less clear—whereas in Democracy Incorporated his thoughts are put forward with less doubt and more affirmation—take it or leave it.  This turn toward the magisterial—the academy’s version of the totalitarian state, let’s be clear, where the professor, if he chooses, can play the great dictator, the benign despot, the clown, or any combination of personae—may already be under way in the last chapter of the Tocqueville book, coursework maths help gcse (561–572).  There, less than two pages from the end, Wolin asks this question: I regret that the answer is not more obscure or open for Wolin, just as I regret that he talks about the political in the past tense (“What was that form?”), as though it were already gone for Tocqueville and perhaps for us. This choice of the past tense leaves him no alternative, it seems, but to sign off in usa essay writers new a final bitter declarative: “Democracy is perpetuated as philanthropic gesture, contemptuously institutionalized as welfare, and denigrated as populism” (572). Note how the ternary rhythm gives the list an air of exhaustivity—that’s all, folks! How depressing. Wolin might have made better use of this scorn and mourn technique by following it with a repetition of the real question he asked at the end of slideshow presentation online paragraph just cited (570), like this: Not only would this ending have been more in the spirit of Tocqueville’s own interrogative mood at the conclusion of DA I and II, but it would have left the reader with a real challenge, worthy of his full attention and intelligence, because the answer is obscure.  One of the reasons it’s obscure is that one cannot even be sure that it’s only a person or group—a “who”—that will control the meanings of democracy. If Barthes, following Saussure, is right help castles homework primary he says that democracy is structured like a language, well, then, that means no one of us is going to totally decide on the meaning of democracy and its fate any more than Lewis Carroll’s Humpty Dumpty decides on the meaning of individual words. The meanings of democracy tomorrow—like the meanings of friendship, marriage, love, liberty, equality, art, war, peace, deathlife, and all the other big subjects that interest most of us (e.g., the Internet)—will be decided on by all of us (not each of us), and maybe by some a thesis how statement formulate to beyond anyone’s will or control.  Study expert case some individuals or groups have more influence than others? Perhaps. But how could we ever predict in advance or measure with certainty afterward whose actions had done what? Who, for example, could predict that the wintry discontent and immolation of a Tunisian fruit seller would change the fate of the Arab world? And why did so many think, before this man’s decision to light himself on fire, that certain peoples are fated to remain unfree?  In the final analysis, however, whatever tactical flaws there might be take little away from the intrinsic merit of Wolin’s truly grand, not just “fine,” achievement. It would again be in Tocqueville’s spirit of paradox to argue that those flaws are even “fortunate falls,” since they help writing help dissertation with instructive and also humanize Wolin, thus bringing him closer to the rest of us more ordinary mortals. Demolanders may love perfectibility, but they secretly hate perfection and are openly hostile to a know-it-all.  But all carping, paradox, and other inverted figures aside, Wolin’s book is arguably the single greatest commentary on Tocqueville ever written. What’s so great about it? Writing service essays cheap things in fact. First, there are “the patient, close readings of Tocqueville’s major works”  and of some minor ones such as the prison essay, along with a keen sense of how one might think of them as a coherent ensemble.  Second, there are substantive but not overwhelming doses of historical background information that allow the reader to appreciate the originality and boldness—the “material event”—of Tocqueville’s achievements as a writer, as well as the complexity and compromises of his political life. Third, the book is uncommonly clear, well organized and motivated, and above all interesting. It is a page-turner (!) because Wolin succeeds in laying out a problem— Where ultimately does Tocqueville stand on democracy? —and relating it to a multitude of questions that engage us all: Where do I stand? where am I going? and my spouse? my kids? their school? my employer? my town? my country? my neighbors? These are large matters, and Wolin’s Tocqueville book is a very fine guide to thinking about them.  Taking these in reverse order we can give an example of each. We have already said how real questions addressed simultaneously to the reader and to the author are interest-creating, and we can add to that sympathy-creating: they place the reader in collaboration with the author on a shared journey of discovery. Here is another example taken from Wolin’s discussion of the chapter in DA I that concerns the present and future of the three races that inhabit the United States, a chapter that he nominates as “at once the lengthiest, the most revealing, and the most enigmatic of the entire work” (266): This is a real question because there is no sign that Wolin has a ready answer, and also because it contains within it many important subproblems. How can genius be a curse? Isn’t God what Americans trust in, not political compromisers? Was God only a front all along, or did Americans lose their way and their nerve—trusting in Clay instead, what a name!—as Heimonet and Rahe both suggest (each in his own way and each with different recommendations writing speech in how to recover and repair)? Wolin’s organizational skills are in evidence with his decision to opt for chapters of manageable length with multiple subdivisions that proceed chronologically through Tocqueville’s life and times. He also offers a parallel supplement of bite-size epigraphs that are each referenced, thereby allowing the reader to follow up. Unreferenced epigraphs can be marveled at like sand dollars, but they risk projecting a haughty, marmoreal coldness—“Closed”—that may annoy or alienate the ordinary reader in democratic times. Another sympathy-builder is Wolin’s tactful placement of his own contribution within the history of the critical conversation on Tocqueville: Without insulting or bragging, Wolin lets the student who wanders in late know she’s welcome, that there is more day to dawn, and she can take part in the journey too. Wolin’s discussion of theory is a good example of an experienced professor’s good judgment about how much of the backstory to give. For example, in this account of how theory and especially utopian theories derive from voyages of discovery: Beginning early in the sixteenth century, the connection between theorizing and journeying acquired an additional dimension due to the voyages of discovery that brought Europeans into contact with vastly different cultures. The homework parents literature for online help, or rather the reported experience, contributed paper write in the unsettling edition papers online for writers 7th research mla of handbook European assumptions about place, time, and the possible forms of human organization. As a result a quantum leap of the political imagination occurred. Mediaeval philosophers had no political utopias. Now, in contrast, Europeans could imagine themselves living differently, not necessarily by adopting exotic forms of life but by organizing in a consistent way the “rational” or “natural” possibilities immanent in their own societies. The word “utopia” (literally “nowhere”) was first coined by Thomas More to describe what he called “the best state of the commonwealth.” (36–37) This is smooth sailing for the ordinary reader, because there are few things a demolander likes more than service writing business essay be told some facts that cover a lot of ground and order in his mind disparate elements that he had never connected before on his own. Wolin gets the college go essay to i want why to done efficiently here and then proceeds to move the reader along through Bacon, Locke, Math homework help rose hillman, Montesquieu, and others in a way that avoids the reefs of superficiality and pedantry and the negative side effects of “great men” fatigue. Examples of Wolin’s sharp textual attention include his two chapters (22 and 23) on Tocqueville’s political career: “ Souvenirs : Recollections In/tranquillity” and “ Souvenirs : Socialism and the Crisis of the Political.” By keeping the title of Tocqueville’s homeworks peri political memoir as Souvenirsthe reader who knows both French and English can hear the word naming both memories and the signifying material tokens a traveler accumulates. In these two chapters Wolin demonstrates that while the revolutionary events of 1848 may not academic papers online buy been Tocqueville’s finest hour when it came to defending the Republican and Christian value of “ fraternité ” (solidarity), his fears about socialism leading to an expansion of centralized State power, and thereby being a threat to his aristocratically tinged concept of the political as quintessentially local, had a certain validity. However it does also look as though Tocqueville was caught in a contradiction of praising popular sovereignty abroad while denying it at home. A second careful demonstration takes place over the following two chapters devoted to The Old Regime and the Revolution. Especially valuable is Wolin’s discussion of Tocqueville’s investment in the “archaic” as a means to resist and perhaps check the will-to-level of the modern State. Wolin explains: This is well put, but it must be remembered that this is Tocqueville’s hopeful vision/version that Wolin is mimicking.  One may note the need to anthropomorphize “the past” english help college homework “the present” as signs of the strain to tell a coherent narrative. The truth, what may really take place, as Wolin goes on to say in research help outline with paper next pages (and seven years later in Chapter Seven, “The Dynamics of the Archaic,” of Democracy Incorporated ), is that two can play at that game; in other words, the force of the archaic is also available for retrofitting and collaborative redeployment by the State (aka Superpower, Wolin’s name for the new entity that resume what for is letter cover from the merger of the political and the economic in later modernity). If that happens, the resistant, archaic Tocquevilles of the world can be made to fall or when necessary be tripped into self-caricature, or flattened into objects of unthinking worship or equally unthinking ridicule like Shakespeare’s Polonius, Wilde’s Canterville Ghost, or Ishiguro’s butler in Remains of the Day (1989), or else be smashed like Winston Smith’s precious paperweight in Orwell’s 1984.  Wolin summarizes the predicament this way: The vulnerability of democracy-modernity is revealed in its drift toward self-caricature: the free but privatized individual turns out to be the jargon by which identity conceals from itself that it is identical and, as such, the condition of despotism rather than its polar opposite. Thus democracy is poised to become for our times what aristocracy was for Tocqueville’s, the archaic remains of a superceded past. Unlike Tocqueville’s aristocracy, however, the passing of democracy, if that is what is happening, is not being experienced as loss, as entrance into a time of postdemocracy, but as freedom from an impossible obligation. What worries Powerpoint presentations business, and what worried Tocqueville, is that we might all end up being thankful to sign over our liberty to Superpower—Phew, what a load off my mind!—instead of mourning or resisting its passing. This possibility, which Wolin spooks up with the “specter” metaphor  in the title of his follow-up book, leads him to ask about three pages later the real question that I suggested might have more fittingly been placed at the very end. I cite it again this time with the contextualizing lead-in sentences that make it all the more understandable and engaging for the ordinary reader: As I’ve already said, if the goal is to “nurture the civic conscience of society” and thereby ordinary popular sovereignty and the real advantages that can come from a democratic regime, I don’t think it’s productive to scare the reader (or oneself) with the idea that an anthropomorphic Superpower is calling all the shots, any more than it would be useful or true to say that we are more or less all decultured hollow men living in solitary confinement under the surveillance of some Superwarden, like at the American prisons Tocqueville visited and perversely recommended imitating in his government report (see Wolin’s Chapter Twenty, homework year 1 maths Penitentiary Temptation”). Those who agree will prefer to let the question hang in writing scientific proposal air— Who controls the meanings of democracy and, thereby, its fate? —and recall the possible effect of the smallest “Yip” or “Yop,” the serendipity of the Tocqueville Paradox, and the chance of unintended consequences. This is not a recommendation that we renounce deliberation and choice and let “invisible hands” or “forces” do all the work. Perhaps better than anyone since Tocqueville himself, Wolin recalls for us the high stakes and the infinite responsibility of the task before us. Writing service essay music presence of the past, to use his phrase, and the whole arc of Wolin’s project are clearly stated in the last paragraph of his Introduction: The task: to retrieve a receding democratic present. Keeping in mind Wolin’s lesson that “theorist” means traveler and witness, it should be stressed that he is inviting each and every one of us to take up the task of retrieving democracy, and not merely an avant-garde of “brainworkers” (Orwell) as the elitist, professional-managerial-academic connotation of that word theorist might suggest. What the world needs now, says Wolin at the end of the expanded version of Politics and Vision (606), is a discordant, dissonant democracy—because the former project of reconciliation between community and authority has been largely bulldozed by Superpower paper write chinese to how in won’t be able to be salvaged until communities dig out from beneath the rubble and rebuild. “There’s a place for us,” sing Tony and Maria in two-part harmony during the height of the Cold War ( West Side Story1957, 1961)—a democracy composed of public-spirited amateurs and professionals, ordinary and extraordinary individuals whose diverse talents, dispositions, and types of intelligence are aggregated in ways that welcome open debate, pursue projects of common interest, and avoid unrepairable mistakes.