Tag Archives: Alexis de Tocqueville

The America That Was — The Good and the Bad, by Richard M. Ebeling

Almost nobody in America really knows what it’s like to live in a free society. From Richard M. Ebeling at fff.org:

We live in a time when an understanding and an appreciation of what a free society can or should be like is being slowly lost. Or so it seems, often, to a friend of human liberty. Political interventionism and a revived interest in “democratic socialism” dominate public discourse in almost every corner of life.

Calls are constantly being made for government to do more. Remaining areas of personal life are to be invaded by increased government regulation, redistribution, control, command, and constraint. The idea of the independent and self-responsible individual diminishes in the number of its supporters, or so it appears, with every passing day.

Public-policy debates concern not whether something should be overseen and managed by government, but merely how far the interventionist welfare state should go, and who is going to pay for it.

Continue reading

He Said That? 10/12/17

From Alexis de Tocqueville (1805–1859), French diplomat, political scientist, and historian, Democracy in America (1835, 1840):

Society will develop a new kind of servitude which covers the surface of society with a network of complicated rules, through which the most original minds and the most energetic characters cannot penetrate. It does not tyrannise but it compresses, enervates, extinguishes, and stupefies a people, till each nation is reduced to nothing better than a flock of timid and industrious animals, of which the government is the shepherd.

He Said That? 3/5/17

From Alexis de Tocqueville (1805–1859), French diplomat, political scientist, and historian, Democracy in America (1835):

The happy and powerful do not go into exile, and there are no surer guarantees of equality among men than poverty and misfortune.

He Said That? 4/28/16

From Alexis de Tocqueville (1805-1859), French political thinker and historian, Democracy in America, Volume II, Book 4 (1840):

After having thus successively taken each member of the community in its powerful grasp and fashioned him at will, the government then extends its arm over the whole community. It covers the surface of society with a network of small, complicated rules, minute and uniform, through which the most original minds and the most energetic characters cannot penetrate, to rise above the crowd. The will of man is not shattered, but softened, bent, and guided; men are seldom forced by it to act, but they are constantly restrained from acting. Such a power does not destroy, but it prevents existence: it does not tyrannize, but it compresses, enervates, extinguishes, and stupefies a people, till each nation is reduced to nothing better than a flock of timid and industrious animals, of which the government is the shepherd.

He Said That? 12/21/14

From Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy In America, (1835):

There are at the present time two great nations in the world, which started from different points, but seem to tend towards the same end. I allude to the Russians and the Americans. Both of them have grown up unnoticed; and while the attention of mankind was directed elsewhere, they have suddenly placed themselves in the front rank among the nations, and the world learned their existence and their greatness at almost the same time.

All other nations seem to have nearly reached their natural limits, and they have only to maintain their power; but these are still in the act of growth. All the others have stopped, or continue to advance with extreme difficulty; these alone are proceeding with ease and celerity along a path to which no limit can be perceived. The American struggles against the obstacles that nature opposes to him; the adversaries of the Russian are men. The former combats the wilderness and savage life; the latter, civilization with all its arms. The conquests of the American are therefore gained by the plowshare; those of the Russian by the sword. The Anglo-American relies upon personal interest to accomplish his ends and gives free scope to the unguided strength and common sense of the people; the Russian centers all the authority of society in a single arm. The principal instrument of the former is freedom; of the latter, servitude. Their starting-point is different and their courses are not the same; yet each of them seems marked out by the will of Heaven to sway the destinies of half the globe.

Besides being astoundingly prophetic, this quote may set the stage for 2015, 180 years after it was penned. It appears that the two powers are set to square off once again, and circumstances of geography, economics, and power won’t allow one to defeat the other, or for either to quit the battle. Policymakers in the U.S. seem to think that they have the upper hand. We’ll see. A warning: those who tangle with bears, especially wounded bears, usually emerge the worse for it.

As a final aside, if you’re making out New Year’s resolutions, if you have never read Tocqueville, you could do worse than resolving to do so.

He Said That? 10/26/14

From Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy In America, Volume 1 (1835), which with Volume 2 (1840) are the best and most incisive works ever written on the American experiment:

After the general idea of virtue, I know no higher principle than that of right; or rather these two ideas are united in one. The idea of right is simply that of virtue introduced into the political world. It was the idea of right that enabled men to define anarchy and tyranny, and that taught them how to be independent without arrogance and to obey without servility. The man who submits to violence is debased by his compliance; but when he submits to that right of authority which he acknowledges in a fellow creature, he rises in some measure above the person who gives the command. There are no great men without virtue; and there are no great nations—it may almost be added, there would be no society—without respect for right; for what is a union of rational and intelligent beings who are held together only by the bond of force?

Good question.