Democracy in America

Tocqueville opens with a description of how much popular sovereignty matters in the United States, specifying, “the people name their representatives directly and generally choose them every year in order to keep them more completely under their dependence” (165). This means that “the majority” in the population exercises considerable force in society. Tocqueville describes this group as “peaceful citizens who, either by taste or by interest, sincerely desire the good of the country” (165). Political parties are constantly working to gain its support.

Tocqueville distinguishes between citizens with deep and fundamental disagreements, and “when citizens differ among themselves on points that interest all portions of the country equally, such as, for example, the general principles of government” (166). Tocqueville considers “great parties” those who concern themselves with fundamental principles. He has disdain for small parties, declaring, “The means that they employ are miserable, as is the very goal they propose for themselves” (167).

After the Revolutionary War, the United States had two parties locked in debate about the extent of popular sovereignty and the size of government: “One opinion wanted to restrict popular power, the other to extend it indefinitely” (167). Tocqueville points out that the Federalist Party may no longer exist, but its supporters of a strong federal government left a key legacy in the form of the Constitution. Tocqueville considers the general dispute between the North and the South an economic debate about tariffs and not a debate about the nature of the country.

Despite the relative social homogeneity in America, Tocqueville argues that “[f]or want of great parties, the United States swarms with small ones” (169). While they may seem insignificant to outside observers, “as one penetrates the innermost thoughts of these parties more deeply, one perceives that some of them work to narrow the use of public power, the others to extend it” (170). Tocqueville notes that while rich people occupy political positions in other countries, in the United States wealthy people are “obsequious toward the dominant power” though they may secretly not support democracy (171). They generally retreat toward private life rather than set up an opposition movement.