Many American readers like to regard Alexis de Tocqueville as an honorary American and democrat--as the young French aristocrat who came to early America and, enthralled by what he saw, proceeded to ...write an American book explaining democratic America to itself. Yet, as Lucien Jaume argues in this acclaimed intellectual biography,Democracy in Americais best understood as a French book, written primarily for the French, and overwhelmingly concerned with France. "America," Jaume says, "was merely a pretext for studying modern society and the woes of France." For Tocqueville, in short, America was a mirror for France, a way for Tocqueville to write indirectly about his own society, to engage French thinkers and debates, and to come to terms with France's aristocratic legacy.
By taking seriously the idea that Tocqueville's French context is essential for understandingDemocracy in America, Jaume provides a powerful and surprising new interpretation of Tocqueville's book as well as a fresh intellectual and psychological portrait of the author. Situating Tocqueville in the context of the crisis of authority in postrevolutionary France, Jaume shows that Tocqueville was an ambivalent promoter of democracy, a man who tried to reconcile himself to the coming wave, but who was also nostalgic for the aristocratic world in which he was rooted--and who believed that it would be necessary to preserve aristocratic values in order to protect liberty under democracy. Indeed, Jaume argues that one of Tocqueville's most important and original ideas was to recognize that democracy posed the threat of a new and hidden form of despotism.
Con Tocqueville la soberanía va a conocer un desplazamiento de lugar. En la articulación entre "estado social y "estado político", la soberanía toma formas inusitadas en la tradición de la teoría ...política y se convierte en la opinión democrática, la nueva "autoridad social" (siguiendo la visión de Lamennais). En Estados Unidos se da además en la vida local, forma de sociabilidad y poder en la que lo público y lo privado interactúan; porque la autoridad moderna y democrática del futuro ya no será propiedad y privilegio del Estado, tal y como ocurría en la monarquía absoluta de las sociedades europeas.
En français, l’adjectif « exemplaire » peut qualifier une personne ou une conduite de valeur exceptionnelle ; comme substantif, « l’exemplaire » est l’élément d’une série parmi d’autres. C’est que ...nous considérons le quantitatif dans le monde matériel, le qualitatif dans le monde moral. Tocqueville avait élaboré une comparaison entre l’exemplarité aristocratique (l’honneur, etc.) et la démocratie de « l’intérêt bien entendu ». De nos jours, la démocratie exige l’exemplarité chez les dirigeants. Est-ce là un trait aristocratique et élitiste dans la démocratie ? Ou un vrai principe et une valeur normative du modèle républicain français classique ?
La Vème République doit être rattachée au passé historique et politique de la France. Son fondateur, Charles de Gaulle, a écrit qu'il lui fallait, en 1958, doter l'Etat d'institutions qui étaient ...faibles, défaillantes, depuis 1789 (Mémoires de De Gaulle). On peut montrer que ces nouvelles institutions sont en phase avec ce qui a été le courant dominant du libéralisme français : Guizot, les Doctrinaires, l'orléanisme. Les réformes successives apportées (droits de l'opposition, QPC, etc.) ont atténué le caractère original de l'institution, en maintenant cependant le cap des libertés sous la primauté de l'Etat gardien de l'intérêt général. Le courant du "libéralisme par l'Etat" et non contre l'Etat, qui a toujours privilégié la puissance administrative.
Some reflections about the concept of authoritarian democracy. If authoritarian democracy looks like a self-destructing concept, however it is near to Tocqueville’s thought arguing that democracy is ...not a guarantee per se for freedom ; in the History, Athenian democracy is rich of authoritarian elements such as political, social and moral surveillance, obligation of denunciation, members of the Assembly under permanent pressure, etc. It is well known that the people, said to be the sovereign, in fact cannot rule : the criticism soon appears in Bossuet or Guizot’s publications. Here lies the problem of the identity between the leaders and the people, the source of a fallacious but compelling aspiration. When such a desire increases, the legitimacy of authoritarian powers grows more and more. What wants the authoritarian leader is to sweep away the mediations and balances of power, for the celebration of the identity between masses and the State. Concerning now the totalitarian system, the motto is that the whole people has entered the State, so that the most dangerous enemy lies in the individual and his judging capacity.In fact, the authoritarian features are not outside the democratic spirit when it becomes proud of the limitless power through the participation of the masses. Constitutionalist limitations are some possible sources of moderation in so far as citizens have learned that the representation process is not a mirror of identification. It is through Otherness that people can be self-governing. From a philosophical point of view, freedom nurtured by symbols of otherness perishes in the magnifying mirror of the Leader.
Le concept de démocratie autoritaire peut paraître contradictoire ; il est illustré par la pensée de Tocqueville, qui montre que la démocratie (pouvoir souverain du peuple) n’est pas en soi une garantie de liberté, mais aussi par l’Histoire : la démocratie athénienne a produit nombre de traits autoritaires (surveillance, dénonciation comme vertu politique, pressions multiples sur chaque individu en Assemblée, etc.). L’équation est bien connue : dans la démocratie représentative, « le peuple est souverain mais ne gouverne pas », la critique apparaît aussi bien chez Bossuet ou chez Guizot, pour contester ce traitement du concept de souveraineté. De là naît le problème de l’identité entre gouvernants et gouvernés, source d’une aspiration fallacieuse mais toujours renaissante. Plus cette identité est réclamée, plus le caractère autoritaire du pouvoir risque de se légitimer. La démocratie autoritaire veut « débarrasser la démocratie » des corps intermédiaires et des contrepoids au pouvoir, pour que l’on acclame l’identité désirée. Quant au système totalitaire, il prétend avoir fait passer le peuple entier dans le pouvoir et voit dans le jugement individuel l’ennemi qu’il a le plus à craindre. Les tendances autoritaires ne sont donc pas externes à la démocratie devenant ivre de puissance, et exaltant les masses ; les limitations constitutionnalistes sont du côté des remèdes, si l’éducation des citoyens sait leur apprendre que représentation n’est pas identification : le peuple ne se gouverne lui-même que par son Autre, reconnu comme tel. Pour le dire en philosophie, la liberté naît de l’altérité et meurt de la pulsion spéculaire.
From its birth, the French Fifth Republic shows a tendency to secure freedom not against the state but under state protection. In a different way of the English or the American liberal procedures, ...such as judicial review, in France liberals have chosen to consider associations, press, education, markets, etc. not from the civil society eye, but from the administrative standpoint, in the concern of "interet general" (the general interest). Various mitigations or implements have been introduced, due to outside influences (globalization, European Union). The spirit of such a liberalism, according to Guizot (July monarchy) is progressively mixed with Benjamin Constant's model, i.e. individualism plus constitutionalism.
From its birth, the French Fifth Republic shows a tendency to secure freedom not against the state but under state protection. In a different way of the English or the American liberal procedures, ...such as judicial review, in France liberals have chosen to consider associations, press, education, markets, etc. not from the civil society eye, but from the administrative standpoint, in the concern of "interet general" (the general interest). Various mitigations or implements have been introduced, due to outside influences (globalization, European Union). The spirit of such a liberalism, according to Guizot (July monarchy) is progressively mixed with Benjamin Constant's model, i.e. individualism plus constitutionalism. Dalla sua nascita, la Quinta Repubblica francese mostra una tendenza a garantire la liberta non contro lo Stato ma sotto la protezione dello Stato. In un modo diverso dalle procedure liberali inglesi o americane, come il controllo giudiziario, in Francia i liberali hanno scelto di considerare le associazioni, la stampa, l'istruzione, i mercati, ecc. non dal punto di vista della societa civile, ma dal punto di vista amministrativo, nella prospettiva dell'"interet general" (l'interesse generale). Sono state poi introdotte varie mitigazioni o strumenti, a causa di influenze esterne (globalizzazione, Unione Europea). Lo spirito di tale liberalismo alla Guizot (monarchia di luglio) si mescola progressivamente al modello di Benjamin Constant, cioe all'individualismo con piu il costituzionalismo. Keywords / Parole chiave: Orleanism, liberalism, general interest, legitimacy, Fifth Republic / Orleanismo, liberalism, interesse generale, legittimita, Quinta Repubblica.
Sovereignty changed its place with Tocqueville. Through the articulation between the “social state” and the “political state”, sovereignty experiences a new wrinkle far from those traditional forms ...it used to have in political theory: it becomes democratic opinion, the new “social authority” (in the sense given by Lamennais). It happened in the United States in the framework of local life, a form of sociability and power where the interaction of public and private takes place. Thereafter, future modern and democratic authority will not be the property and the privilege of the State anymore, as it used to be in the absolute monarchies of European societies.
Con Tocqueville la soberanía va a conocer un desplazamiento de lugar. En la articulación entre “estado social y “estado político”, la soberanía toma formas inusitadas en la tradición de la teoría política y se convierte en la opinión democrática, la nueva “autoridad social” (siguiendo la visión de Lamennais). En Estados Unidos se da además en la vida local, forma de sociabilidad y poder en la que lo público y lo privado interactúan; porque la autoridad moderna y democrática del futuro ya no será propiedad y privilegio del Estado, tal y como ocurría en la monarquía absoluta de las sociedades europeas.
PDF
