Alexis de Tocqueville, 1805 geboren, war ein um dreizehn Jahre älterer Zeitgenosse von Karl Marx. Beide beherrschte vom ersten Erwachen ihrer geistigen Regsamkeit an das Bewußtsein, in einer Zeit unerhörter Umwäl zungen aller Prinzipien und aller Bedingungen zu leben, die bis dahin für die Ordnung und den Geist des täglichen Lebens in der menschlichen Ge sellschaft maßgebend gewesen waren. Was die geistige Leidenschaft beider - so ver~chiedenartiger, so entgegengesetzter Menschen - von vornherein fesselte, war die Frage nach der (...) Bedeutung, nach dem Wo-Hinaus dieser Entwicklung und ihr Verlangen, die entscheidenden Momente dieser Ver änderung bestimmen zu können. In der Unmittelbarkeit und Eindringlich keit der Beobachtung, in der Kraft und Schärfe der Analyse und was die grundsätzliche Bedeutung des Aspektes anbetrifft, unter dem sie die Er eignisse ihrer Zeit begriffen, konnte wohl einer dem anderen die Waage halten. Ja, in einer Hinsicht mindestens mochte Tocqueville sogar Marx übertreffen: in dem aufrichtigen Bemühen um vollständige Vorurteils losigkeit und in dem ernsten Bewußtsein der Verantwortung als Mitleben der seiner Zeit. Beide, Marx wie Tocqueville, konstatieren übereinstimmend - wenn auch aus sehr verschiedener Perspektive - zwei entscheidende Merkmale ihrer Zeit: einmal die Tendenz zu einer vollständigen Aufhebung aller gesell schaftlichen Unterscheidung, den Zug zu einer fortschreitenden Gleichheit der Vielen. Und ferner: den zwangsläufigen Charakter dieser Entwick lung, die ihre Antriebe aus der gesamten Vergangenheit und Geistesart des Abendlandes erhält. (shrink)

Über die Demokratie in Nordamerika.--Über dei Demokratie in Amerika,--Rede zur Aufnahme in die Französische Akademie.--Über Politik und Wissenschaft.--Aus den "Erinnerungen".--Aus dem Briefwechsel.--Aus "Das ancien Régime und die Revolution."--Aus den Fragmenten zur Fortsetzung von "L'ancien régime et la révolution."--Allgemeine Bemerkungen über die Florentinische Republik, besonders über den Unterschied zwischen der sogennanten Florentiner Demokratie und unserer heutigen Demokratie.--Aphorismen.

The nineteenth-century French writer examines the development of democratic government in the United States and the state of political and social life.

The Old Regime and the Revolution is Alexis de Tocqueville's great meditation on the origins and meanings of the French Revolution. One of the most profound and influential studies of this pivotal event, it remains a relevant and stimulating discussion of the problem of preserving individual and political freedom in the modern world. Alan Kahan's translation provides a faithful, readable rendering of Tocqueville's last masterpiece, and includes notes and variants which reveal Tocqueville's sources and include excerpts (...) from his drafts and revisions. The introduction by France's most eminent scholars of Tocqueville and the French Revolution, Françoise Mélonio and the late François Furet, provides a brilliant analysis of the work. (shrink)

This book provides the first complete, literal English translation of Alexis de Tocqueville’s and Gustave de Beaumont’s first edition of On the Penitentiary System in the United States and Its Application to France. The work contains a critical comparison of two competing American penitentiary disciplines known as the Auburn and Philadelphia systems, an evaluation of whether American penitentiaries can successfully work in France, a detailed description of Houses of Refuge as the first juvenile detention centers, and an argument (...) against penal colonization. The work provides valuable insights into understanding Tocqueville as a statesman, as well as a comparative look at civic engagement in early American and French penal reform movements. The Translator’s Introduction provides historical context for understanding Tocqueville’s work in French penal reform and the major themes of the report. The book thus fills a void in Tocquevillian studies and extrapolates the roots of American and French criminal justice systems in the nineteenth century. (shrink)

The purpose of this paper is fundamentally didactic, in that it approaches in a descriptive way some of the basic notions of the philosophical-political thought of Alexis de Tocqueville including democracy and social equity and the dialectical concept of freedom. This paper focuses mainly on some chapters of the Tocqueville’s masterpiece ‘Democracy in America’ and ends with an epilogue where interpretative ideas are proposed in order to provide an updated framework for his thought.

To speak of democracy is often to speak less of a fact than of a hope. In his introduction to Democracy in America, Alexis de Tocqueville admitted that ‘… in America I saw more than America; I sought the image of democracy itself, with its inclinations, its character, its prejudices and its passions, in order to learn what we have to fear or to hope from its progress’. De Tocqueville recognised that democracy's success would rely on its (...) constant promotion, the affirmation and revaluation of its terms and conditions, such that it sustains the investedness of its (voluntary) participants. This paper considers the work of Stanley Cavell as inheriting the tone of de Tocqueville's romantic will to democracy, particularly in the discovery of its analogous image in ‘remarriage comedy’. I look first at the ways in which popular pictures of (in this case, American) democracy on film sustain an expression of hope for a better set of relations amongst equal and consenting participants, an expression that is identified as romantic in nature. By contrast, I will also discuss how representations of democracy's reality on screen—pictures that sit outside comfortable generic expectations, and reveal those moments in which interest in democratic participation or values has ebbed or is dormant—have as much to tell us about democracy's character as more idealist expressions of what it might be or become. (shrink)

Se analiza la situación paradójica que presenta la secularización en América reconstruida por Tocqueville. Teniendo presente este postulado, mostraremos la ruptura que se establece con respecto a la Ilustración en el tema de la secularización, en aras de descubrir una nueva variante de la crisis de la filosofía que permaneces vinculada con la nueva estructura organizacional de las sociedades democráticas modernas. Asimismo, mostraremos cómo el perfil liberal de Tocqueville se muestra superador de las versiones eurocéntricas en el tema (...) de la crisis de la filosofía, en la medida de que su devaluación no procede únicamente de anomalías metodológicas, sino del cambio de autoridad intelectual operado por la secularización para empoderar a la opinión pública. Por esta razón, procederemos finalmente a mostrar en qué medida la novedad de la paradoja de la secularización en América reconstruida por Tocqueville, define la crisis de la filosofía como asunto del futuro en virtud de la serie de problemas inéditos que demanda satisfacer. (shrink)

La actualidad del pensamiento político de Tocqueville es relevante por el hecho de haber establecido las bases teóricas para una reflexión profunda sobre el Estado democrático y el porvenir de la libertad y la igualdad en el seno de la sociedad moderna capitalista. Sus reflexiones resultan hoy en día de gran utilidad, precisamente ahora en que los detentadores del gran capital a nivel internacional, plantean continuas reformulaciones de corte autoritario a la teoría democrática. El siguiente texto, resultado de investigación, (...) expone la concepción de democracia que elabora Alexis de Tocqueville, en relación con los principios de igualdad y libertad ciudadanas, como ideales políticos que inaugura la modernidad. (shrink)

Alexis de Tocqueville mantuvo una muy abundante correspondencia a lo largo de su vida. Familiares y relevantes contemporáneos, no sólo franceses, figuran entre sus destinatarios. Sus cartas ofrecen una parte esencial de su pensamiento, expuesto con la libertad propia del género epistolar, y representan una componente de primera importancia dentro de su obra literaria. Las Cartas Americanas, escritas entre abril de 1831 y febrero de 1832 con ocasión de su viaje al Nuevo Mundo, son un buen ejemplo. Además, (...) por servir de referencia inmediata a su gran obra, La democracia en América, cobran un valor excepcional. Cabe pensar que este apartado de la correspondencia tocquevillana, acotado en el tiempo a la perfección, está bien estudiado al día de hoy. Sin embargo una carta, dirigida a su hermano Edouard 3 el 20 de junio de 1831 desde Nueva York e inédita hasta este momento, evidencia que no es así. A ello nos referimos en este trabajo. (shrink)

In this chapter I argue that Alexis de Tocqueville describes the virtue of citizenship in a way that is relevant to contemporary virtue ethics. He explains how a group can possess a virtue that is distinct from the virtue of individual members of the group. (this is an unofficial draft).

Alexis de Tocqueville was one of the greatest political thinkers of all time. Born a French aristocrat, he lost nearly his entire family in the Reign of Terror, and he spent most of his adult life struggling for liberty under the unsuccessful regimes of nineteenth-century France. At age twenty-five he travelled to America and encountered democracy for the first time. This firsthand experience contributed to his incisive writing on liberty and democracy. The ancien re;gime launched the scholarly study (...) of the French Revolution, and Democracy in America remains the best book ever written by a European about the United States. This is a brilliant account of his life. (shrink)

Tocqueville, como todos los grandes clásicos, es inagotable. A man for all seasons, como lo prueba su reciente éxito en China y Japón, dos países y dos sistemas políticos tan alejados de la historia europea y del modelo democrático que él describió que le hubiera parecido sorprendente que le utilizaran como referencia. Ser un clásico inagotable con solo dos obras de obligada lectura es un logro del que pocos pueden vanagloriarse. Quizá Hobbes, quizá John Locke, dos de los autores (...) que menciona Lucien Jaume en el primer artículo de este monográfico que presentamos en la revista Araucaria. (shrink)

In 1835, Alexis de Tocqueville famously called for 'a new political science' that could address the problems and possibilities of a 'world itself quite new.' For Tocqueville, the democratic world needed not just a new political science, but also new arts of statesmanship and leadership. In this volume, editors Brian Danoff and L. Joseph Hebert, Jr. have brought together a diverse set of essays which reveal that Tocqueville's understanding of democratic statesmanship remains highly relevant today.

Alexis de Tocqueville (1805-1859) was born into an aristocratic family with strong political connections. He served as a representative in the French Chamber of Deputies starting in 1839 and was briefly Minister of Foreign of Affairs in 1849. As an author, he attained instant fame after publishing the first part of Democracy in America in 1835 (the second part appeared in 1840). In 1838, he was elected to the Academy of Moral and Political Sciences and, in 1841, to (...) the even more prestigious French Academy whose forty members were, in principle, the greatest living writers in the French language, known as 'the immortals.' In spite of these achievements, his was an anguished life. He was tormented by the depressing fluctuations of his country between revolution and Bonapartism, and by his own political ineffectiveness. Yet, it was not a failed life. Although he was unable to modify the course of history, he succeeded in articulating a new set of terms for the comprehension of political regimes and how they change. His cultivation of paradoxical theses (for example, that revolutions often occur when improving social conditions create rising expectations), his perception of how cultural values affect government and vice versa, and finally, his capacity to dramatize why the understanding of social institutions is an important part of our search for meaning in life, all this made him a profound historical and sociological thinker. The existential problem at the heart of Tocqueville's identity was that he was a democratically inclined aristocrat. (shrink)

Na wstępie autor twierdzi, że w wyniku Wielkiej Rewolucji nastąpił podział francuskiej myśli politycznej XIX w. na dwa przeciwstawne sobie nurty: konserwatyzm i doktryny socjalistyczne. Przeciwstawienie takie utrudnia usytuowanie myśli Alexies de Tocquevllle na siatce ówczesnych sporów teoretycznych. Celem tej pracy jest ukazanie, w jaki sposób de Tocqueville, żywiąc niechęć do francuskiej ideologii socjalistycznej, nie mieści się również na przeciwległym biegunie stanowisk politycznych, tj. nie jest myślicielem konserwatywnym. Konfrontacja jego liberalnego i pluralistycznego modelu społeczeństwa z koncepcjami socjalistycznymi z jednej, (...) a myślą konserwatywną z drugiej strony, pozwala wykazać, jak te dwa zazwyczaj sobie przeciwstawne światopoglądy zbliżają się do siebie w sposobie rozumienia funkcji państwa. Obie ideologie żywią wspólną wiarę w siłę instytucji centralnych, a ich ideałem jest państwo o rozszerzonych kompetencjach. Socjaliści domagali się rządu represjonującego życie społeczne, aby szybciej i skutecznej wprowadzić słuszne zasady sprawiedliwości. Podobnie i zdaniem konserwatystów porządek społeczny cechować się musi hierarchią i realizacją zasady zwierzchnictwa. Tocqueville natomiast uważa, że społeczeństwo nie opiera się na porządku zesłanym przez Boga, ani też na schemacie wywiedzionym z praw natury czy kosmosu. Nie uznaje zatem hierarchicznej struktury społecznej, ani tezy o nadrzędności interesu politycznego względem celów prywatnych. Przeprowadzone w artykule porównania pozwalają konflikty ideologiczne lat 1815 - 1848 widzieć również jako spory toczone pomiędzy zasadą centralizacji a społecznym pluralizmem, wolnością a absolutyzmem politycznym. (shrink)

This article discusses Tocqueville’s and Mill’s views of the cultural progress of indigenous colonial societies in the context of the current debate about the Enlightenment. The analysis of their philosophical outlooks tends to support Jonathan Israel’s interpretation of the Enlightenment, yet with one important difference: while Israel emphasizes the Radical Enlightenment as the chief instigator of the movement towards modern democracy, Tocqueville’s and Mill’s views emphasize the preponderance of the Moderate Enlightenment, which, while sharing the radical advocacy for (...) rationalism, broad education, religious toleration, the critique of despotism, and other enlightened ideals, nonetheless shunned support of full democracy or universal suffrage. Tocqueville’s and Mill’s Eurocentric views regarding the possible ameliorative influence of colonialism emphasize how the ideals of the Moderate Enlightenment had an overriding effect on the emergence of nineteenth-century liberalism. While this conclusion broadly accepts Israel’s outline of the intellectual history of the Enlightenment, it gives greater weight than he does to the Moderate Enlightenment. (shrink)

In this article we are concerned with an analysis of the modern crisis of democracy. This aim should be pursued through the related works of Alexis de Tocqueville and Max Weber. The study begins with the claim that both authors, not only are concerned with the analysis of the rising mass democracy, but furthermore they outline the main tendencies of this new form of society. On the one hand, there is a proclivity of the contemporary systems to enter (...) into what could be denominated «individualist despotism». On the other hand, the underpinning of the plebiscitary democracy runs through an increasing «bureaucratization», which remains on the intensive process of instrumental rationality. (shrink)