Tocqueville’s analysis for the potential of an industrial aristocracy to grow in a democracy is useful in analyzing America prior to and during the Gilded Age. This time period in American history exhibits the growth of an industrial aristocracy that Tocqueville prophetically warned readers possibly happening in democracies. To fully understand how the growth of such an elite can develop, it’s necessary to first look at Tocqueville’s arguments on how the opportunity of political freedom can give a democracy two tendencies: that of the despot or the sovereign. Also, the Tocquevillian perspective of the economic animal in a democracy helps reinforce the inevitable notion of American’s transition from an agrarian society to an industrial empire. However, what came with the preference for the efficiency of industry over the equality of republican values was a select few reaping the benefits of the rest. The aristocratic class that grew in America during Gilded Age occurred for many reasons. The American-will, coupled with technological advancement and a large European immigrant labor supply, had changed the structure of labor. This division of labor made …show more content…
Analyzing this time period in America brings further understanding to the implications that can arise in a democracy. More importantly the very same democratic mechanisms that took away equality in the first place can be utilized by the citizenry to bring it back. With an understanding of Tocqueville’s argument of industrial aristocracy in a democracy, the American Gilded Age and the sovereign response to the elite, the appearance of inequality during this time period becomes clearer. The culmination of evidence across multiple sources will prove what led to the growth of an industrial aristocracy, its effects on the worker and the overall effectiveness of the sovereign
The inequalities in America during the gilded age came from an unequal distribution of wealth, leaving only a small percentage of individuals with riches while the rest suffered in poverty even with constant overproduction of everyday necessities. People argued that social darwinism would chose who was meant to be rich and the survival of the fittest would deem who was better than the rest. From 1870-1895, journalists and critics dismantled the inequality during the period and some offer their own solutions.
Tocqueville seems to like democracy in its ideal form. However, nothing can be perfect and thus America is not a perfect democracy. Tocqueville found numerous problems with democracy and the influence it had on the populace. These problems range from their distrust of dogmatic beliefs to the imperfect equality that is in place in America. He also found the effects of these problems to be quite problematic as well. For instance, individualism, an effect of equality, is very problematic to democracy. Tocqueville enjoys considering America as an experiment in democracy, but does not find it to be faultless.
Alexis de Tocqueville's visit to the United States in the early part of the nineteenth century prompted his work Democracy in America, in which he expressed the ability to make democracy work. Throughout his travels Tocqueville noted that private interest and personal gain motivated the actions of most Americans, which in turn cultivated a strong sense of individualism. Tocqueville believed that this individualism would soon "sap the virtue of public life" (395) and create a despotism of selfishness. This growth of despotism would be created by citizens becoming too individualistic, and therefore not bothering to fulfill their civic duties or exercise their freedom. Tocqueville feared that the political order of America would soon become aimed at the satisfaction of individual needs, rather than the greater good of society. Alexis de Tocqueville viewed participation in public affairs, the growth of associations and newspapers, the principle of self-interest properly understood, and religion as the only means by which American democracy could combat the effects of individualism.
Alexis De Tocqueville painted a portrait of a flourishing democracy within the text, Democracy in America. Tocqueville proposed that equality was one of the fundamental tenets that aided the success of American democracy. He defined equality of conditions as the end of aristocracy: “the noble has fallen on the social ladder, and the commoner has risen; the one descends, the other climbs. Each half century brings them nearer, and soon they are going to touch” (Democracy in America, book, 6). American democracy flourishes because there is an established equality of conditions for all; American democracy enforced the absence of formal rank and the end of births into positions of power while encouraging forms of power that challenged rank and privilege. However, in his analysis, Alexis De Tocqueville recognized the presence of race based inequality and cautioned that the reinforcement of a racial hierarchy could be detrimental to American democracy. Such observations characterize Tocqueville as insightful and
Have you ever wondered what it would have been like to live in this world and country during the transition from a rural; agriculture society to an economic nation rise of an industrialized society? Well that is exactly what the people of the Gilded Age experienced. It was a time of a dramatic business and political practice. In order for the business’s to rise there soon became a great amount of separation towards the people and the country. This caused our society to experience a stressful time and made it very difficult for ideas and concepts to equal out. Throughout this specific document there are four sources that were written by different individuals. Each and every source has an explanation and an overview of the times in the Gilded Age.
Tocqueville (rather bizarrely in retrospect) conceived of America as having “an almost complete equality of conditions”. While in respect to the French alone, Tocqueville argues, “the taste and the idea of freedom began to exist and to be developed only at the time when social conditions were tending to equality and as a consequence of that very equality.” Tocqueville draws the first stirrings of equality to the “political power of the clergy,” which upon being consolidated began to spread and upon its ranks to “all classes, to rich and poor, commoner, and noble.” Thus “through the Church, equality penetrates into the government, and he who as a serf must have vegetated in perpetual bondage could, as a priest, take his place in the midst of nobles, and would often sit above kings.” Tocqueville continues to trace the ascent of equality and descent of aristocracy to the financial demise of kings “ruining themselves by their great enterprises; the nobles exhausting their resources by private wars, [while] the lower orders enriching themselves by commerce”. And with the advent and spread of education, the “value attached to high birth declines just as fast as new avenues to power are
Poor working conditions in mines in The Gilded Age was as normal to the people then as a 40 hour workweek is to us now. Looking back at all of the horrific and terrible accidents and such that happened then seems unimaginable to us, but to them, it was just another day at work. Children worked in the mines to support their families, often in company towns where inhaling soot all day and contracting black lung was really your only option for a job.
To some, "capitalistic democracy" conjures up the picture of a utopia where the free market is accompanied by individual liberty and social justice. To others, however, the term is more like a paradox—despite tremendous economic power, the advanced industrial nations are not immune from the evils of socio-political inequality as well as economical disparity. Amongst the capitalist democracies of the world, it is an established and well-known fact that when compared with the advanced industrial countries in Europe, the United States has the worst condition of economical-political inequality and social injustice. Its government is the least progressive, and its social inequalities the most deplorable. To explain the condition in the U.S. today, both the universality of capitalistic democracies and the peculiarities the American system employs—as well as this system's political and historical development—must be examined and explored.
The Gilded Age gets its name from a book by Mark Twain called The Gilded Age: a Tale of Today. It was written in 1873, and unfortunately was not that successful. While the Gilded Age conjures up visions of ostentatious displays of wealth and decorative parties, the over all topic was politics. The book gives an extremely negative assessment of the state of American democracy at that time. Which does not come as a huge surprise coming from Twain, who famously said "It could probably be shown by facts and figures that there is no distinctly native American criminal class except Congress.” So when faced with sweeping changes in the American economy after the Civil War, the American political system both nationally and locally dealt with these problems in the best way possible, by inevitably and incredibly becoming corrupt.
In Democracy in America, Alexis De Tocqueville argues that the women and families in Aristocratic and Democratic societies have substantial distinctive characteristics in terms of livelihood. According to Tocqueville, the state of government affiliated with Americans also defined its people. He issued a negative view of Americans, created by their party affiliation. After examining the influence of a democratic society on the American people, he concluded that “ equality of conditions modifies the relations of citizens among themselves” (558). In understanding the background of a democratic society, it is necessary to emphasize the impact “equality of conditions” has created amongst Americans. However, in terms of an aristocratic society,
One of the key ways of distinguishing the two democracies is that of Jefferson’s vision of a Natural Aristocracy and Jackson’s of the common man. The natural aristocracy, a view that is essentially elitist, stemmed from the idea that intellectual men of good and virtuous character such as frontiersme...
In the early twentieth century, scholars gain a deeper understanding of the ideology behind those who partook in the American Revolution. People’s motivations throughout the American Revolution are a result of their desire for a new society that is not based on the old world’s standards of monarchy, privilege, and social hierarchy. Likewise, people want a society in the new world to determine one’s status based on one’s abilities, efforts, and talents and to characterize equality. A meritocracy, not monarchy become prevalent in the new world’s society, and one’s family’s reputation, wealth, and titles are no longer important. Therefore, colonists rebuke the old world system, which was questioned throughout the American Revolution. Wood explains that “republic individuals were no longer destined to be what their fathers were” (Wood 99). His explanation shows that scholars treated the American Revolution as an extension of the development America’s meritocracy and as an innovation of America’s resulting society during the early twentieth
William Domhoff’s investigation into America’s ruling class is an eye-opening and poignant reading experience, even for enlightened individuals regarding the US social class system. His book, Who Rules America, exploits the fundamental failures in America’s governing bodies to provide adequate resources for class mobility and shared power. He identifies history, corporate and social hierarchy, money-driven politics, a two-party system, and a policy-making process orchestrated by American elites amongst a vast array of causes leading to an ultimate effect of class-domination theory pervading American society. In articulating his thesis and supporting assertions, Domhoff appeals rhetorically toward an audience with prior knowledge of America’s
Along with the enforcement of partible inheritance, which required property to be equally partitioned among heirs, the development of any form of hierarchy seemed nearly impossible, as Tocqueville notes “equal division… tends powerfully to the destruction of large fortunes, and especially of large domains.” But with the end of the Civil War and the industrial boom that flourished in United States came the arrival of the robber barons, a group of people who accrued substantially high amounts of money in one lifetime, who soon began to shape the political and geographical landscape of America. By controlling numerous production and transportation industries across the country, these wealthy elites soon began to turn governmental institutions towards their favor through the control of money flowing into politicians hands. This transition towards the accommodation of the elite marked the start of a long progression away from what the founders had originally outlined in the constitution. It was at this time that the nation
The United States was maturing into an industrial economy. Freedom, Equality, and Democracy where main goals for this period in time. The talk of “better classes,” “respectable classes,” and “dangerous classes” were the main concentration in public discussions. Traditional definitions of freedom were barred by poverty living along side the edge of growing class millionaires. The link now between freedom and equality was based on the skills and wealth and not by hard work.