Democracy in America: Chapter 10 Summary & Analysis

Tocqueville turns to political associations, an institution that Americans have embraced more than any other people has. The instinctive American suspicion of authority leads citizens to spontaneously join together in groups of any size to defend and promote ideas of public safety, morality, industry, and religion. While Tocqueville compares the right of association to the liberty of the press, he argues that the press has far more authority, since its members express opinions explicitly and exactly, united into one front. In addition, the power of meeting in person leads to the maintenance of bonds and opinions. Finally, such groups may finally decide to unite as a political party—becoming a kind of government within the government.

Tocqueville considers the liberty of the press as absolutely necessary in a democracy, but unlimited liberty of association is more dangerous, since it threatens the functioning of the government. That the existence of such a liberty has thus far not damaged America is due to Americans’ longstanding familiarity with the principle, and the way in which it has actually come to work against the tyranny of the majority—since as soon as a party becomes dominant, it pervades all of society, and the opposite party’s only recourse is to establish itself outside this dominance.

In an aristocracy, Tocqueville argues, the nobles and wealthy are natural associations that check power, while in a democracy it is necessary to construct such associations. People have a natural right to act in common with each other based on their beliefs; nonetheless, Tocqueville argues that in some nations, such a liberty can be taken to excess. Most Europeans, indeed, think of the right of association as a weapon of conflict. In America, however, it’s thought of as a more benign means of peaceful debate and competition. This is because certain European parties are so different from the majority that they can never hope for majority support, but are strong enough to fight it nevertheless, while in America those whose opinions are opposed to the majority are powerless against it. Since differences in opinion are so small, this is not too dangerous in America. In Europe, meanwhile, the freedom of association can lead to a desire to attack the government.

Finally, America’s right of universal suffrage means that the minority can never appeal to imaginary support, whereas in Europe, minorities often claim that they have more support than is apparent, since their support base may consist of all the people without a right to vote. Since European associations desire to fight rather than convince, they’re often military in style, exerting tyrannical control over their members—quite unlike the case in America.