De Tocqueville and Mearsheimer

De Tocqueville states, “For a democratic republic to survive without trouble in a European nation, it would be necessary for republics to be established in all the others at the same time.” I found it interesting how this quote ties into what my World Politics class is currently talking about. In John Mearsheimer’s The Tragedy of Great Power Politics it talks about how states are unable to trust one another because it is impossible to know what the intentions of the other states are. This lack of trust then leads to the inability to cooperate because trusting other states is potentially dangerous to the state’s survival. This relates to how a sole democracy would not survive in Europe when surrounded by aristocracies, oligarchies, and monarchies. The main point that caught my attention when relating these two texts was when Mearsheimer talked about the democratic peace theory, where democracies do not go to war against other democracies. Although there would not be complete trust or cooperation between states if this were the situation, there would be a significant increase in trust and cooperation if all the states in Europe were democracies.

Egypt and Education?

De Tocqueville considered citizens possessing an education to be one of the most important factors when building a democracy. With an education, citizens are less likely to fall to aristocratic principles. According to the CIA World Factbook, only 71.4% of the total population (over the age of 15) are literate. From De Tocqueville's perspective, I would be worried. In the news it has been mentioned that the leaders of the military have been summoned to temporarily handle the country's affairs. Will Egypt be able to form a democracy with a low literacy percentage or will the military elite form an aristocratic government? However, this is the 21st century and times are different, so hopefully Egypt will be able to prove De Tocqueville wrong.

De Tocqueville and Equality

In Democracy in America, I feel that Alexis De Tocqueville confuses equality with democracy and freedom. De Tocqueville states, “I said in the last chapter that a high degree of equality prevailed among the immigrants who first settled on the coast of New England.” If there was equality amongst the immigrants in New England, why didn’t it continue in America? Why were women barred from voting? Why were blacks different from whites? Why were some capable of owning land while others were not? Just because a government is set up with democratic principles does not mean that there is equality for all. In a democratic government people are given freedoms that others cannot infringe upon, but there have been certain groups throughout history where these freedoms have been infringed upon. I think De Tocqueville is able to gloss over equality because he is smitten with the fact that the immigrants started off with nothing and were able to build a new, democratic form of government – moving away from European systems and moving into the future, by themselves. Even if there was not equality for all, the equality presented at this time was a significant step up from the monarchy under which De Tocqueville lived.

Lincoln and the American Dream

Earlier this year I said in a blog, “I believe the American Dream has to do with finding personal happiness and being able to realize that having a dream gives oneself a purpose in life.” Throughout this chapter it became evident that in past years the American Dream was associated with wealth and power. With this, I disagree with Lincoln when Cullen mentions, “Lincoln was not opposed to slavery because he cared very much about slaves. He was opposed to slavery because he cared very, very deeply about whites (and unlike some of his fellow Republicans, he cared about all whites). Slavery was bad for them. And it was bad because it contaminated and, if left unchecked, would eventually destroy the American Dream which he believed so deeply.” I disagree with this because it does not take into consideration all Americans. It frustrates me when Lincoln noted that the main difference between slaves and whites was skin color, but yet they were not capable of upward mobility, and thus, the American Dream (yes I am a where of the time period).

However I also agree with Lincoln when he said slavery would destroy the American Dream because slaves cannot bring people the American Dream. With how I view the American Dream, whites needed to abandon slavery so they could find their American Dream on their own.

Religion in America

Today’s reading reminded me of a blog I wrote a couple days ago, where I talked about how the 2^nd Great Awakening influenced the formation of the American identity. “As mass popular movements, churches came to be places in which fundamental political assumptions were forged: ideas about the meaning of America…” I found this statement interesting because I never considered that it was religion that helped contribute to what American democracy is. I always thought it was American democratic ideals came first and these influenced the development of religion in America. I also found it interesting when it said, “In an age when people expected almost everything from religion (and churches) and almost nothing from politics (and the state), the popular churches are essential to comprehending the enduring shape of American democracy.” I think people relied so heavily on religion and churches because it gave them a social outlet. People could discuss their ideas on religion, politics, etc. It was a place where they could build solid relationships in a developing country.

Religious Literature

In the 2^nd Great Awakening, I believe literature was of great importance because it allowed readers to dream. People could create new ideals for their country by being exposed to different types of literature. After reading Amy Frykholm’s reading, I believe religious literature produces citizens who are willing to unite with others, are able to understand that they will encounter citizens who are different from them, and work towards a better future.

2nd Great Awakening

In Evangelical Mobilization it states, “The Methodists were also hurt by their association with the Church of England, an association the American patriots perceived as disloyalty to the United States.” The 2^nd Great Awakening was so successful because it allowed Americans to start anew. Americans wanted to form new ideals that had not been influenced by the old ideals. I think the 2^nd Great Awakening continued for as long as it did because it helped the process of establishing the American identity. For example, women greatly affected social reform because they realized any person could cause change if it was really needed or wanted. The 2^nd Great Awakening caused Americans to realize that America has the potential to be anything the citizens want it to be. A cheesy clique to expand on this point - History doesn’t write itself - the Americans who worked within the religious and social revivals realized they needed to put their ideas out there if they wanted the country to move forward and achieve its fullest potential.

Democracy

After reading Walt Whitman’s Democratic Vistas, I believe America’s democracy is no longer regard with the esteem it once had. There was once a strong devotion to protecting the ideals of one’s country and believing future generations would find it in themselves to continue the tradition of making America a better place - not that there aren’t people who still do this. Walt Whitman speaks of a time when America’s democracy was threatened and many Americans felt they had a responsibility to themselves and their country to maintain their democracy. I feel Americans and today’s democracy are no longer like the Americans and democracy Walt Whitman spoke of. I feel democracy has become something everyday Americans leave to the politicians, thus moving more towards a republic. I feel Americans are accepting of this because their personal freedoms are not being threatened in the process or they are unaware of the transition from a democracy to a republic.  

Throughout Walt Whitman’s Democratic Vistas he emphasizes that democracy can be found within every individual, “Then it is also good to reduce the whole matter to the consideration of the single self, a man, a woman, on permanent grounds.” Every individual has the power to bring about democracy. It then becomes the individual’s responsibility to come together with others to allow democracy to flourish. I feel this is where today’s democracy falls apart. For the most part, Americans no longer pride themselves on governing the country and personally upholding the ideals of democracy. We are leaving this to the people we elect, those who are willing to speak for the masses. I feel this is not the community Whitman spoke of when he said, “where a couple of hundred best men and women, of ordinary worldly status, have by luck been drawn together, with nothing extra of genius or wealth, but virtuous, chaste, industrious, cheerful, resolute, friendly and devout.” Democracy will be successful when every American finds it in himself/herself to work for all Americans. This is why America is becoming more of a republic, our democracy is no longer a “for the people by the people” but a by these people for those people.

When reading the Democratic Vistas, I came across an idea that has remained somewhat the same from Walt Whitman’s democracy to our democracy. Whitman speaks of unknown soldiers who were willing to fight and eventually die to preserve their ideals. He called them, “The People, of their own choice, fighting, dying for their own idea, insolently attack’d by the secession-slave-power, and its very existence imperil’d.” The people as people are more powerful than the known. Everyday Americans who come together to protect their ideals are more powerful and moving than a political figurehead who represents the democratic ideals. I believe this is the strong end of democracy in America and will continue to be the strong end because it illustrates the driving forces behind democracy – the ability to utilize personal freedoms. Democracy allows us to think, speak, and act freely. If these freedoms were to be threatened, Americans today would easily become comparable to the unknown soldiers who tried to defend their ideals.

Whitman later goes on to say, “We have frequently printed the word Democracy. Yet I cannot too often repeat that it is a word the real gist of which still sleeps, quite unawaken’d, notwithstanding the resonance and the many angry tempests out of which its syllables have come, from pen to tongue.” Americans then and Americans now struggle with the meaning of democracy because so many Americans are unable to find it in themselves to contribute to democracy. How can America have an effective democracy if not all of its citizens chose not to partake in the one thing most important to our democracy, voting? If we are to understand democracy, we need to care about democracy. To understand democracy, we need to do more than simply lookup the definition of democracy and say we now understand. To understand our democracy, we need to become immersed in democracy. We need to realize that if we want our democracy to affect us, we need to affect it.

Egypt

Today in class we began to talk about the conflict in Egypt and America’s growing interest of a functioning democratic Egyptian government. On the news various correspondents and political officials have given vague statements regarding this conflict because the US wants to remain on the up and up, whether this is with Mubarak, the Egyptian people, or other countries in the world who are also monitoring this conflict. I believe the US and other countries should not become involved in Egypt’s political problems because that would corrupt Egypt’s attempts to form a government that works best for the Egyptian people. I do not think it is right for countries to suggest methods for enabling a democratic government when the cultures of the two countries vary greatly – just because democracy works in American does not mean it will work in Egypt. If the US were to suggest that Egypt follow the US’s model for democracy, it would not be a true democracy for the Egyptian people. The Egyptians should be the ones who determine what works best for them and how they are to go about reaching a democracy if that is what they truly want. If the Egyptians want to bring about change, they should find it within themselves to do so.