NORTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY
DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE
POLITICAL
SCIENCE 551\45l SPRING
2009
American
Political Thought II: OFFICE:
ZULAUF 113
TOCQUEVILLE OFFICE HOURS 11-11:50
PROFESSOR
GLENN MTW
& by appointment CLASS MEETS: 3:30-4:45
MW
753-1091\gglenn@niu.edu
COURSE REQUIREMENTS
REQUIRED
TEXTS: There are two required texts plus one required chapter. 1) Alexis de
Tocqueville, Democracy in America ed. J. P. Mayer, translated by George
Lawrence (Harper and Row,(2000). Please purchase this
edition of DiA. It should be brought to each
class since the class is conducted like a seminar, that is, we will read and
discuss passages from the text. 2) Pierre Manent, Tocqueville
and the Nature of Democracy (1996). 3)James Bryce,
The Predictions of Hamilton and Tocqueville (1887). Each student is
required to have his or her own copy of each reading. Not to do so will be
regarded as not fulfilling a course requirement.
ATTENDANCE:
Students are expected to attend each class,
Attendance is taken and final grades reduced for more than three
absences.
Operationally, “absence” means not being
present when attendance is taken and includes lateness as well as
non-attendance. Students are expected to
be in class at the beginning of the class and remain until class is over. If
special circumstances apply to your situation in this regard, please inform the
professor at the beginning of the course.
Six absences normally means
automatic failure in the class. Written
explanations for absences are expected as a courtesy and should be submitted as
soon as possible afterwards. Registered
auditors are welcome but they are expected to attend the class on the same
basis as other students. If attendance
becomes inconstant, they will be expected to withdraw.
WRITING
REQUIREMENTS:
Graduate students are required to do a 2500
word research paper, a presentation on a chapter in the Manent
book, and a take home final exam.
Undergraduates are required to do a
900-1000 word paper on a topic assigned by the professor and the take home
final exam.
The
paper topic will be on material we have covered in the class. It does not
require research beyond the class readings. The topic will be assigned
Wednesday 3/4 and is due Wednesday 3/25.
Research Papers: Some possible
topics are attached to the syllabus. Read what it says there about getting a
topic approved. Topics must be submitted for approval in writing by Monday
February 9. Completed papers are due Wednesday April 15. (So do your taxes
early.)
Final Exam: Exam questions will be
handed out Monday 4/20 and are due at the regularly scheduled final exam time
Monday May 4 at 4:00 pm.
CLASS
PARTICIPATION: This class will be
conducted as a seminar. This means 1)students are expected to have read the
assigned material before class and to participate in the discussions;
2)students should expect to be interrogated about the readings; to cite them in
response to questions asked by the professor; to demonstrate the ability to
raise thoughtful questions about them; to show a grasp of the arguments made;
to detect and try to figure our ambiguity; to see relationships between parts
of the arguments; to discover strengths and weaknesses in them; and to make
thoughtful judgments about which are better and worse. 3) In addition, reading
Tocqueville is like holding up a mirror to our politics and society. We have to ask such questions as: "Do I
see in our politics and society what Tocqueville describes? If we seem to have changed in certain ways,
is the change along lines predicted by Tocqueville? If not, what might be the explanation(s)?
Even when Tocqueville missed some important developments in American democracy,
are those developments still intelligible on the basis of his analysis? Do I
find plausible and acceptable Tocqueville's
description of democracy, and what makes its persistence possible? If not, is the problem Tocqueville or me? 4)Students
should also be able to answer, thoughtfully and to the point, questions put by
the professor. The best students will demonstrate these things in their written
work as well as in class discussions.
CLASSROOM
DEMEANOR: Students are expected to conduct themselves in a manner befitting the
serious business in which we are engaged. “Serious” means that it is not just
any question we are discussing but how we ought to live together. More
specifically, we are discussing the democratic society and government in which
we live and its plus’ and minus’. These are matters
about which we have feelings and opinions, frequently strong one. Hence, they
touch on matters close to our hearts. Students are entitled to ask tough
questions, and to make strong observations and arguments, and the professor can
be expected to respond similarly. Things
can get hot when discussing such important matters political and ethical about
which there is disagreement. However, an
atmosphere of respect and civility is expected and should be cultivated.
FINAL GRADES. Final grades are a composite of the professor's
judgment about your performance on the written and oral requirements, less any
considerations arising from lax attendance. Final grades are not determined by
assigning a certain percentage to the various parts of the course
requirements. Each part will count in
the instructor's judgment of your final grade. However, be advised that this is
a reading and discussion seminar and that the daily discussion is a very large
part of your grade. It is enough to do well on the written assignments.
CLASS SCHEDULE
The following is an approximate schedule.
Two circumstances might effect how closely we can follow it. 1) The biggest
circumstance is that it is in the nature of this class, that there is some
uncertainty about how long it will take to cover some of the topics and what
topics you or I may wish to explore in more depth. 2) Although I have taught a
Tocqueville seminar previously, I have never taught it in the two days a week
format. Accordingly, the schedule below is only an approximate guide to help
you do the reading. If you are uncertain about what we will cover in the next
class, please make it a point to ask at the end of the preceding class. In
general, it is your responsibility to know what material will be covered each
class.
DATES READINGS
1/12
Syllabus to be handed out. Overview
of topics and questions to be studied. Introduction to
the class. What is American political thought and why should we study
it? Why study Tocqueville?
1/14
Author's Preface to the Twelfth Edition, xiii-xiv. Author's Introduction: The
utter novelty, importance and confusing effects of the democratic revolution,
pp. 9-20.
Recommended: Students who have not studied the Founding are
strongly encouraged to read Bryce Part I (pp. 1-10). This is a fairly good
summary of the Founders’ thought and concerns about the dangers to the
republican constitution they were establishing. Students are encouraged to ask
questions about Bryce’s summary.
1/19 No class. University Holiday.
1/21
Volume 1, Part 1. The nature and institutions
of American democracy: it's Puritan origin 2 (31-49)
its social conditions 3 (50-57); Sovereignty of the
people 4 (58-60);
1/26 The nature and institutions of American
democracy continued: first the states 5 (61-98);
1/28 the novel judicial power (99-105);
"political jurisdiction" 7 (l06-11).
2/2 The Federal Constitution 8 (112-70)
2/4
(continued) The Federal Constitution 8 (l12-70).
2/9 Research paper topics must be approved
by today (graduate students only). Papers due 4/15.
2/9 Volume 1, Part 2. Beyond the institutions and
forms: the sovereign power of the people. That the people govern 1 (l73);
political parties 2 (174-79); freedom of the press 3 (l80-88);
2/11 No class
2/16 "political associations" 4 (189-95); "democracy's own
inclinations" 5 (l96-230).
2/18 Social advantages of democratic government 6 (23l-45);
2/23 Effects of omnipotence of the majority 7 (246-61).
Restraints on majority tyranny 8 (262-76);
2/25-3/2
laws, mores and religion in
preserving the democratic republic 9(277-3l5).
3/4 Future of the three races in the United States 10 (3l6-363);
whether the union
will last (363-395);
3/4 Paper topics assigned today. Undergraduates
only. 900-1000 words. Paper is due 3/25.
3/9-3/11
Spring Break
3/16 (continued) Future of the three races: the chances their Republican
institutions will last (395-400); Causes of the Americans commercial greatness
(400-407); conclusion of Vol. 1 (408-413).
3/18 Volume 2, Part l.
Democracy's influence on "ideas" concerning: philosophy l-4 (429-42); how religion in America
uses democratic instincts 5-7 (442-52); equality and human perfectibility 8
(452-54).
3/23(continued).
Desire for practical knowledge 9 & l0 (454-65); concerning
"the people" 15 (475-77); language 16 (477-82);
history 20
(493-96).
3/23 Volume
2, Part 2.
Democracy's influence on "sentiments" concerning: why American love
equality more than liberty l (503-06). Individualism 2-3 (506-09); American
remedies to individualism and its effects 4-7 (509-24);
3/25 900-1000 word paper due today (undergraduates only).
3/25 individualism continued
(509-524). "self-interest properly
understood" 8-9 (525-30).Physical pleasures 10-14 (530-4l);
3/30
religion and spirituality l5 (542-46), trade and industry 19 (551-54). Volume 2, Part 3. Democracy's
influence on "mores" properly
so called" [cf. p 287]: on mores 1-5 (561-80). On the family 8
(584-89);
4/1
on male/female relations 9-l2 (590-603);
4/6 on "social connectedness"13
(604-05).
On manners 14 (605-08); on change 17 (614-15);
4/8 On honor 18 (616-27); on ambition 19 (627-32). On great
revolutions 21 (634-45); on war 22, 24-26 (645-51,654-64).
4/13 Volume 2, Part 4. Democratic "ideas and
feelings" influence on Political
Society. Equality and the taste for free institutions 1 (667-68). Equality and
the concentration of political power 2-5 (667-91);
4/15-4/20 the sort of despotism democratic nations have to fear 6-7
(690-705);
4/20 Take-Home Exam handed out
4/22-29
The last three classes each graduate student will
present a short reflection on, or reaction to, one of the nine chapters in Manent. Each presentation will be allocated about 10
minutes followed by discussion. We should cover 3 presentations/discussions per
class.
May
4
The final exam due at
scheduled final exam time 4:00 pm.
We will have a regular class instead of an in-class
exam. We will read and discuss Bryce, Parts II-V.
Papers
Directions
Below are possible paper topics. However,
you are free to formulate your own. Whether you develop your own topic or use
one of the topics below, your topic should be submitted in writing and approved
by Monday February 9. Only one person may work on each topic and the principal
is “first come, first served.” The paper is due Wednesday April 15.
Here is what I am looking for in the paper.
It should interpret and make intelligent observations about some aspect of Tocqueville’s teaching or about some controversy in
Tocqueville scholarship. The goal is to see how well you can understand and
propose solutions to problems of interpretation on the basis of the text.
The paper must be a maximum of 2500 words.
Please include a word count. Papers which exceed the maximum by an unreasonable
amount will be returned unread and docked one grade for lateness. What
constitutes “unreasonable” is determined by the prudence of the instructor.
Topics
1.
What is Tocqueville's understanding of the democratic
(modern?) penchant for forgetting? Why is he so impressed by it? What is it
about democracy (or modernity?) which encourages forgetting and what are its
consequences for democratic society and politics?
2.
In her keynote speech at the l992 Democratic National Convention Barbara Jordan
said :"This country can ill afford to continue to
function using less than half of its human resources, brain power and kinetic
energy. Our l9th century visitor from
France, de Tocqueville, observed in his work Democracy in America, `If I
were asked to what singular substance do I mainly attribute the prosperity and
growing strength of the American people, I should reply: To the superiority of
their women.' The 20th century will not close without our presence being keenly
felt." (The Tocqueville quote in on p. 603 of our text).
What does Tocqueville mean? Superior compared to whom? In
what respects? Through what means
does Tocqueville think American women's superiority works to achieve
"prosperity and growing strength"? In what ways is Tocqueville's thought on these questions in agreement or
disagreement what you understand Ms. Jordan's use of his quote to suggest?
Would Tocqueville agree that America is not currently using its woman power or
that women's "presence" is not already "keenly felt" in
politics? (The complete text of the Jordan speech is in VITAL SPEECHES OF THE
DAY, Aug. l5, l992, Vol. LV111, No. 21, pp. 651-52. I have copies.)
3.
Reflect on Tocqueville in light of the following statement. "Modernity, in all its forms, conceives
of man and his environment as infinitely malleable, capable of being shaped
however the individual artisan wishes. When confronted by the intransigence of
reality, the modern artisan can only assume that some recalcitrance or evil is
to blame. If only the evil ones can be neutralized or negated the dream city on
the hill will become a reality.
Otherwise even more intensified doses of manipulation and transformation
are ordered. Of course the good modern
cannot accept the existence of natural limits for it counters his absolute
faith in equality and the possibility of a temporal redemption." To what
extent, and on what topics, would you say Tocqueville's
thought does or does not partake of "modernity" thus understood? Does
he in any way share this understanding of modernity? Is there anything
in his thought that works against modernity conceived in this way?
4.
Tocqueville sees a tension in America between what we would call "liberal
constitutionalism" (the protection of individual rights, limited and
deliberative government) and "democracy" understood as rule by the
people. We have come to call the regime
characterized by that tension "liberal democracy" though that is not Tocqueville's term. He thinks that American institutions
and laws (on the state and local as well as national level) help mediate that tension
but that they are not sufficient. He
also thinks that this tension is not self-regulating as Richard Hofstadter,
Martin Diamond and advocates of judicial review suggest. He thought that, in
addition, certain "mores" must be cultivated in order to maintain
liberal democracy. In other words, those who wish to preserve liberal democracy
must be able to distinguish those mores which preserve liberal democracy
from those which undermine and destroy it. State as fully as you
can, his understanding of the tension between constitutionalism and democracy;
what institutions and mores he thought important for mediating that tension;
how he thought those mores might be fostered; and what political consequences
he foresaw if they were not fostered.
5. "...democracies have a taste, and often
a passion, for general ideas; that is because of their peculiar qualities, good
and bad. The form this love of general ideas takes in language is a continual
use of generic terms and abstract words and a particular way
of using them...Democratic peoples have this passion for generic terms
and abstract words because such phrases broaden the scope of thought and allow
the mind to include much in few words." (Democracy in America p.
48l) Compare this thought to the following
from Orwell.
"Don't you see that the whole aim of
Newspeak, Winston, is to narrow the range of thought? In the end we shall make thoughtcrime
literally impossible because there will be no words in which to express
it. Every concept that can ever be
needed will be expressed by exactly one word, with its meaning rigidly defined
and all its subsidiary meanings rubbed out and forgotten. Already...we're not far from that
point...Every year fewer and fewer words, and the range of consciousness always
a little smaller...The Revolution will be complete when the language is
perfect. Has it ever occurred to you,
Winston, that by the year 2050, at the very latest, not a single human being
will be alive who could understand such a conversation as we are having
now?"
(Syme to Winston in George Orwell, 1984 [New York:
New American Library, l98l, p. 46-47])
Would you say that democracy's effect on
language, as understood by Tocqueville, (in Volume II, Part 1, Chapters 3, l3,
l5 and l6) does more to lay the groundwork for, or to erect barriers to, the
goal of Newspeak?
6. "Providence has given each individual
the amount of reason necessary for him to look after himself in matters of his
own exclusive concern. That is the great
maxim on which civil and political society in the United States rests; the
father of a family applies it to his children, a master to his servants, a
township to those under its administration, a province to the townships, a
state to the provinces, and the Union to the states. Extended to the nation as a
whole, it becomes the dogma of the sovereignty of the people" (Democracy
in America, p. 397).
How does this "great maxim"
square with what Tocqueville elsewhere describes as Americans astonishing
deference to "public opinion" (p. 435) or with American women's
"freely" submitting of "their own will" to what he in
another place describes as the "yoke" or "bonds of
matrimony" (p. 593)? To what extent would you say this "great maxim"
is still that "on which civil and political society in the United States
rests"? To whatever extent you do
not regard it as such a maxim, what other maxim or maxim's
seem to you to have replaced or perhaps qualified it? In other words, how would you say "the
dogma of the sovereignty of the people" would appear to have changed in
this respect?
7. What do you find instructive about Tocqueville's discussion of "the Three Races that
Inhabit the United States"? (Volume 1, Part II, Chapter l0, pp. 316-407). In what respects did he, and did he not,
correctly foresee the future in these matters? In what respects is the outcome
of these matters still in doubt? What
would you say is instructive about the grounds of his predictions whether the
predictions themselves were correct or incorrect?
8. Consider Tocqueville's
observation "that all those who formerly accepted this terrible principle
[of Negro slavery] are not now equally free to get rid of it"? What does this observation suggest about the
wisdom and morality of introducing slavery in the first place.
Consider this question from the point of view of preserving equal freedom
rather than from either a white or a Negro point of view. If it was unwise
and/or immoral in the first place, what would you say would have to have
overcome that unwisdom and immorality to make slavery’s
introduction possible? Was it anything
specifically relating to democracy or was it something more generically human?
9.
Among Tocqueville's most remarkable predictions is
this. "There are now two great
nations in the world which, starting from different points, seem to be
advancing toward the same goal: the Russians and the Anglo-Americans...Their
point of departure is different and their paths diverse; nevertheless, each
seems called by some secret design of Providence one day to hold in its hands
the destinies of half the world." (Volume 1, Part II,
Conclusion, pp. 412-413). This prediction came true in ways Tocqueville
could not have foreseen. In Russia there
came into being a Marxist-Leninist world revolutionary movement, which
Tocqueville simply could not foresee because Marx had not yet written when
Tocqueville wrote. And America came to be a world power as an apparently
unintended result of two world wars of which neither the existence nor the
consequences were foreseeable in l835.
Moreover, in l835, America and Russia were not even major world powers.
So what could possibly account for Tocqueville's
amazing foresight in this regard?
10.
To what extent is the following statement correct or incorrect on the basis of Tocqueville's text?
"If decentralization of governing to the local level is what
Tocqueville believes is the desirable `administrative decentralization', then Tocqueville's argument cannot
be used to defend the `federalism' of the semi-autonomous states in effecting
that decentralization. Federalism is neither a sufficient substitute nor a
necessary condition for the kind of decentralization which Tocqueville thinks
is necessary and beneficial to democracy."
11.
Tocqueville foresees and fears that modern democracy might succumb to a wholly
new kind of tyranny which he called "soft despotism". (See Volume II, Part 4, pp. 690-705). A recent writer, in
opposing the movement towards euthanasia or "assisted suicide", says
this: "The taboos against homicide, suicide, and euthanasia-like those
against incest, adultery, and fornication, central insights of the receding
wisdom from a more sensible age-are today weak and increasingly defenseless
against the rising tide of gentle dehumanization. Yet they are all that stands
between us and the flood. Everyone who
cares truly for human dignity and decency . . . must now come to their defense,
before it is too late."
Might there be some connection between the
movements of opinion and mores which Tocqueville sees as leading to "soft
despotism" and those which the contemporary writer sees as leading to
"gentle dehumanization"? Or
are they wholly unrelated?
12.
The 19th century French thinker Benjamin Constant distinguished ancient from
modern liberty thusly: "The aim of the Ancients was the sharing of social
power among all the citizens. That is
what they called liberty. The aim of the
Moderns is to provide security for private enjoyment, and they call liberty the
guarantees that institutions accord that enjoyment." To what extent does Tocqueville's analysis understand liberty as one or the
other? Which does he think is better and
which worse? How does he think the
better liberty can be fostered and preserved?
13.
How does Tocqueville think that the legal profession can be useful, and even
extremely important, in a democracy? ( See Volume 1,
Part 2, Chapter 8, pp. 263-270) Does his argument seem plausible to you? To the extent it does not, how would you
account for that?
l4.
"I think democratic peoples have a natural taste for liberty; left to
themselves, they will seek it, cherish it, and be sad if it is taken from
them. But their passion for equality is
ardent, insatiable, eternal, and invincible.
They want equality in freedom, and if they cannot have that, they still
want equality in slavery. They will put
up with poverty, servitude, and barbarism, but they will not endure
aristocracy" (Democracy in America, p. 506). To what extent would you say that this
statement does or does not make intelligible contemporary American politics?
15.
The Presidential elections of l980, 1984 and l988 and 2000 featured discussions
about the place of religion in American politics and public life. The l992 elections had little of that but
instead featured discussion of "family values". Consider the
following Tocquevillian comment. ". . . the great severity of mores which one notices in the United
States has it primary origin in [religious] beliefs. There religion is often powerless to restrain
men . . . but it reigns supreme in the souls of the women, and it is women who
shape mores. Certainly of all countries
in the world America is the one in which the marriage tie is most respected . .
. In Europe almost all the disorders of society are born around the domestic
hearth and not far from the nuptial bed . . . Whereas the European tries to
escape his sorrows at home by troubling society, the American derives from his
home that love of order which he carries over into affairs of state . . . while
the law allows the American people to do everything, there are things which
religion prevents them from imagining and forbids them to dare. Religion, which
never intervenes directly in the government of American society, should
therefore be considered as the first of their political institutions, for
although it did not give them the taste for liberty, it singularly facilitates
their use thereof." (Democracy in America, p. 292)
Summarize as fully as possible Tocqueville's understanding of the sense in which "religion
is the first of our political institutions." To what extent would you say
this is still true? To the extent it is
no longer true, what consequences would one expect from that change? Contrast Tocqueville's understanding with the Supreme Court's view
of the place of religion in our public life in Everson v. Board of Education
330 U.S. 8-16 (1947).
16. Tocqueville says that civil and political associations are vital to fostering the love of self-government in democracy. (See Vol. II, Part II, Ch. 5 ‘On the Use Which the Americans Make of Associations in Civil Life’). In recent years, some observers have argued that Americans have become less inclined to participate in such associations. They see a growing preference for private life and a growing indifference to social life. An important statement of this thesis is Bowling Alone by Robert Putnam. How is this decline explainable on the basis of Tocqueville’s analysis? What political consequences would Tocqueville predict are likely to follow from this decline?