Mark

Do you believe that Tocqueville’s beliefs still apply today and if so which ones?

Well said.

One of the little tidbits that always struck me as frighteningly prescient in Tocqueville’s tome is that he asserted the rowdy Americans had a real preference for physicality and spectacle over introspection and sentiment. There was a certain impatience in the air that allowed mere production to replace craftsmanship to an extent that everyone called themselves an artist but few created to a level qualifying as artistry. This tendency has been worked by the powers that be to an extent that spectacle is not just the preference, it’s demanded , like a junky demanding quick fix. Art, of course, or worse yet, pansy aestheticism is the province of the deranged or flaccid….or, flaccidly deranged.

Introspection is, of course for sissys and those weirdos called “intellectuals” , while sentiment has been steamrolled by sentimentality sponsored by the Network of your choice.

Bill suggests that the conservative today should take a copy of Democracy in America. Anything else? Not a VISA card, I assume.

This must be what a conservative wilderness means: alone in America with a copy of “Democracy in America” as our guide.

Was Tocqueville a practicing Christian? It sounds as if he was, but, at least from this article, he sounds a bit like Santayana, who was, if not an Atheist, at least skeptical about Christianity. In other words, did Tocqueville believe Christianity was true, or did he see it as necessary for the survival of civilization.

I don’t think there are any alternatives to religion that will keep a nation unified and restrain material appetites. I am concerned that since we live in such a multicultural, and fractured country, that our rulers will continue to resort to war and ideology as unifying forces.

I am not sure I am the right person to ask as I was being lazy in not reading Tocqueville. =)

Having said that I maybe unique on this blog in that in my job I get to see what I believe the government is really trying to do to a majority of society in a limited setting. I believe that the government is trying to limit free thinking and limit the number of choices individuals are allowed to make. A non-questioning society is a servile society (sorry for stealing part of the title from one of your other blogs).

In the end a non-questioning society we becomes like Rome where few have power and money but the majority have their entertainment to occupy them so they do not think about what happens when the money is gone. Eventually the drain on the systems causes collapse. At that point those who want to succeed will work hard (and in many cases just to survive as the ruins are pillaged).

As for suggestions I have always been better at punching holes in what others have said versus coming up with solutions but a solution that comes to mind is one that I have argued against for a long time and I have heard you advocate before and that is term limits for politicians in this country. If a person is limited in the amount of time he serves then he is effectively limited in the power he can build long term. As such he is more likely to look to the greater good versus long term power of the institution that he serves. I have lots of arguments against this but it is at least a partial solution and a discussion here would take me pages.

Another solution is for people who have a firm belief in a creator and have the conviction of their beliefs to be more important than personal power to run for office at local levels (and eventually national levels) and slowly change the country from the bottom. Unfortunately many people’s belief is firmer in power than it is in the future and many abandon their beliefs’ for the power once they are in a position to gain power. Few stick with their beliefs though term limits could actually help here as well since people would have less time for their beliefs to change. It reminds me of a quote “All it takes for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing”.

As you have said in many of your blogs is that we are all responsible because as a group and many times as individuals we have chosen to stand aside versus taking the risk or ridicule and economic loss to stand up for what we believe is right. ………If the above is true than the best solution is for people like yourself to run for office and hold to your convictions.

Actually, the possibility of passing one’s property to future generations induces one to think of the future, of the legacy one will give to one’s children and grandchildren. In that light, a 100% inheritance tax would be disastrous.

Other ways to expand the temporal horizon of the democratic soul? As you suggest, economic hard times might force us out of our complacent hedonism. This might, as Tocqueville suggests, bring about a renewed interest in religion. Do you have any suggestions?

War is problematic, of course. National mobilization, the draft, victory gardens, etc. all may help to pull the focus away from the present and toward a concrete future goal. But as Tocqueville and others have noted, war is the best means to centralize power. If Tocqueville’s vision consists in robust local communities practicing the art of freedom, the centralization of political power works against this end.

I am sure that I will sound naive as I have not read Tocqueville but your article led me to a couple of questions that I hope might be answered (so I will not have to read him as I have other books in line before him).

You stated that Tocqueville believed that “Ultimately, religious belief extends the scope of one’s thoughts to the very fringes of eternity.” There are religions that do not focus on an eternity. I assume therefore that Tocqueville uses not so much religion as Judeo – Christian heritage. If I am mistaken please correct me on this.

I also noticed that the problems that Tocqueville noted would happen, could easily apply to the period before the Great Depression. Life was easy, people thought mostly about material goods, and commerce was king for the day. That all changed with the Great Depression which may have been caused by excess in the system like our current situation. Using Tocqueville’s model I assume that the public works as instituted by FDR being long term projects (such as the TVA) would have brought us out of the Depression. Instead it was WWII with the rebuilding of the military and destroyed property and the sucking off the labor force to fight. Laborers were reduced (drafted) and because of the destruction of finished goods (factories, buildings and military equipment) demand for making things increased. The demand became so great that some items had to be limited and rationing was instituted. I am not sure that as you say “the national mobilization of people and resources during WWII is a modern example” was really a long term project. After all I would hope that war is never a long term project.

I guess my question related to the above is – other than long term projects and religion, is there another way to get man to look to the future and restore the balance in our Democracy, or do we need a period where it takes hard work just to survive as it did during the Great Depression so that it carries on after the economy recovers?

My last question with Tocqueville is really just a poke at those who believe that inheritances should never be touched by taxation. You stated that Tocqueville’s solution as” He does but the cure might, to some minds, be as distasteful as the illness. In a society that thrives on chance and making a quick buck through investments that require more risk than effort, Tocqueville prescribes a renewal of the idea of hard work. The ideal of quick and easy success must be replaced with ideals that emphasize long-term effort, commitment, and stability.” This would lead me to believe that individual hard work is the prescription for the economy today and not easy wealth. There is no easier wealth to obtain than the wealth of one’s predecessor’s and yet the least amount of work often goes into it (though family farms may be an exception to this rule as normally the whole family helps out). So in an effort to get people to work hard would it be ideal to take tax inheritance at near 100% other than family farms? After all the property (means of production) of people like me cannot be handed down anyways (Trade skill).

On a final note I greatly appreciate your insights and knowledge on Tocqueville and your sharing that with us. I personally agree with most of what you shared here that Tocqueville believed. I look forward to reading more of your blogs.