Not only were the Americans free, according to Tocqueville, but the understanding was that individuals were in the best position to deal with matters concerning only themselves. “…in the United States the county and the township are always based upon the same principle, namely, that everyone is the best judge of what concerns himself alone, and the most proper person to supply his private wants (p. 89).”

 

Tocqueville notes that the effect of the Americans having set up their society the way they have has meant that there is a great deal of public spirit amongst its citizens and that this is very valuable and a big distinction from European governments where the citizenry is not empowered and therefore does not care as much about helping society be well-run. He cites the example of the police in catching criminals, but also the public schools being so widespread and well provisioned, among other things. On the contrary, in Europe, the citizen “…looks upon all these things as unconnected with himself, and as the property of a powerful stranger whom he calls the Government…. This want of interest in his own affairs goes so far that, if his own safety or that of his children is endangered, instead of trying to avert peril, he will fold his arms, and wait till the nation comes to his assistance (p.103).” There is a whole passage here which so clearly delineates our modern perceptions of Europeans and the more individualistic North Americans, though, even in North America, there has arisen much more sentiment that the government is responsible for solving people’s problems instead of themselves.

 

Is this what gave America its great strength? For the people in Tocqueville’s America are like worker-owners who are invested in the success of their company and don’t wait for the boss to suggest cleaning the floor, but having identified the need, simply set about it. What a difference this makes to a company. What a difference it must make to a country! How do we recapture this, for I feel Tocqueville is really on to something here. He seems to be making the case that despite some of the weird problems that giving citizens this freedom and practice in democracy can bring, the upside is so enormous that a government would be remiss to not orient itself along such lines.

 

However, I wonder to what extent this is simply a “founders’” phenomenon. That is, whenever people are involved in the creation and beginning of something, they have great energy and spirit. But as it becomes old and commonplace to conduct themselves along those lines, they begin to lose that enthusiasm, just as workers may be excited during the transition to self-ownership, but eventually wear down once the regular duty of responsibility weighs down on them. If that is the case, is there a way to perpetually re-invigorate it through the creation of new processes or whatnot?

 

I can totally relate to the spirit that Tocqueville is trying to convey of the American people. They have that sense of ownership of their country. They take responsibility for it, as they do for themselves, rather than throwing up their hands (or folding their arms as Tocqueville said) and saying, that’s somebody else’s job to deal with. So, I suppose, then, the question becomes: how do we get citizens to take ownership of their societies again? Tocqueville cites patriotism and religion as the only two things that can keep a country devoted.

 

He goes further: “When a private individual meditates an undertaking, however directly connected it may be with the welfare of society, he never thinks of soliciting the co-operation of the Government, but he publishes his plan, offers to execute it himself, courts the assistance of other individuals, and struggles manfully against all obstacles. Undoubtedly he is often less successful than the State might have been in his position; but in the end the sum of these private undertakings far exceeds all that the Government could have done (p.105)”. It is hard not to think of the $5000 grant just given to a community-group to start an incubator farm by our local government, along with making land available. Citizens have become grant chasers, whether from the public purse or community-minded businesses. To Tocqueville, it is not necessarily that taxpayers are funding things they otherwise wouldn’t, but that citizens that are self-reliant are actually capable of creating a better society. What an interesting argument. Are our local governments contributing to the enfeeblement of our citizenry by handing out grants for projects that could otherwise be funded and supported by individuals? [see letter to editor about this subject by clicking here]