Tocqueville's "New Political Science": A Critical Assessment of Montesquieu's Vision of a Liberal Modernity

Dissertation, The University of Chicago (2002)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

What is "new" about the "new political science" that Tocqueville claimed in Democracy in America was "necessary for a new world" is best understood via a comparison with the thought of Montesquieu. Fundamental to the latter's Spirit of the Laws is a critique of the illiberal character of the classical republic, and an analysis of how a distinctively modern type of popular government became possible via institutional forms that emerged out of European feudalism. Tocqueville, with the benefit of post-revolutionary hindsight, shows how the fundamental nature of modernity, understood now as the democratic social condition [ etat social], has made Montesquieu's vision of a liberal modernity---and its legacy in the liberalism of Constant, Royer-Collard, and Guizot---inadequate. As "a liberal of a new kind," Tocqueville seeks to narrow the divide that Montesquieu and his liberal successors had asserted lay between classical and modern republicanism. According to Tocqueville, vital to the health of modern liberal democracy are institutions and practices that moderate or even run counter the fundamental tendencies of modernity: direct political participation, a modern form of civic virtue, intermediary bodies between the citizens and the government, and mores and religion. This approach to the question of modern liberty thus does not fit easily within the categories of modern liberal thought. Rather, there are surprising resonances in Tocqueville's thought with the procedure of Aristotle's Politics, in which political science appears as a judge between the claims of the various parties and regimes. Although for Tocqueville "philosophy," or a fully self-sufficient, trans-historical, and completely satisfying form of life appears to be impossible, he does not fall prey, as is sometimes alleged, to complete "historicism." In order to bring into focus the limitations of the modern or democratic point of view, he displays it in the light of its opposite, that of "aristocracy." Proceeding by "seeing not so much differently, as further, than each of the parties," Tocqueville shows how modern democracy's self-improvement can and must be grounded in theoretical consideration of the merits of past alternatives

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,219

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Who Needs Anciennete? Tocqueville on Aristocracy and Modernity.S. Drescher - 2003 - History of Political Thought 24 (4):624-646.
Tocqueville and the Liberal Res Publica.André Van de Putte - 2010 - Ethical Perspectives 17 (3):475.
Republican civic virtue, enlightened self-interest and Tocqueville.Jessica L. Kimpell - 2015 - European Journal of Political Theory 14 (3):345-367.
The Cambridge companion to Tocqueville.Cheryl B. Welch (ed.) - 2006 - New York: Cambridge University Press.
Reconsidering Tocqueville's Imperialism.Demin Duan - 2010 - Ethical Perspectives 17 (3):415.
Reading Tocqueville: from oracle to actor.Raf Geenens & Annelien de Dijn (eds.) - 2007 - New York: Palgrave-Macmillan.
Guizot's historical works and J.S. Mill's reception of Tocqueville.G. Varouxakis - 1999 - History of Political Thought 20 (2):292-312.
Fear: Biography of an Idea.E. Corey Robin - 1999 - Dissertation, Yale University
Politesse and Public Opinion in Stendhal’s Red and Black.Richard Boyd - 2005 - European Journal of Political Theory 4 (4):367-392.

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-02-04

Downloads
0

6 months
0

Historical graph of downloads

Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references