A child forever
When I think of the small passions of men of our day, the softness of their mores, the extent of their enlightenment, the purity of their religion, the mildness of their morality, their laborious and steady habits, the restraint that almost all preserve in vice as in virtue, I do not fear that in their chiefs they will find tyrants, but rather schoolmasters.
I think therefore that the kind of oppression with which democratic peoples are threatened will resemble nothing that has preceded it in the world; our contemporaries would not find its image in their memories. I myself seek in vain an expression that exactly reproduces the idea that I form of it for myself and that contains it; the old words despotism and tyranny are not suitable. The thing is new, therefore I must try to define it, since I cannot name it.
I want to imagine with what new features despotism could be produced in the world: I see an innumerable crowd of like and equal men who revolve on themselves without repose, procuring the small and vulgar pleasures with which they fill their souls. Each of them, withdrawn and apart, is like a stranger to the destiny of all the others: his children and his particular friends form the whole human species for him; as for dwelling with his fellow citizens, he is beside them, but he does not see them; he touches them and does not feel them; he exists only in himself alone, and if a family still remains for him, one can at least say that he no longer has a native country.
Above these an immense tutelary power is elevated, which alone takes charge of assuring their enjoyments and watching over their fate. It is absolute, detailed, regular, far-seeing, and mild. It would resemble paternal power if, like that, it had for its object to prepare men for manhood; but on the contrary, it seeks only to keep them fixed irrevocably in childhood; it likes citizens to enjoy themselves provided that they think only of enjoying themselves. It willingly works for their happiness; but it wants to be the unique agent and sole arbiter of that; it provides for their security, foresees and secures their needs, facilitates their pleasures, conducts their principal affairs, directs their industries, regulates their estates, divides their inheritances; can it not take away from them entirely the trouble of thinking and the pain of living?
So it is that every day it renders the employment of free will less useful and more rare; it confines the action of the will in a smaller space and little by little steals the very use of free will from each citizen. Equality has prepared men for all these things: it has disposed them to tolerate them and often even to regard them as a benefit.
Thus, after taking each individual by turns in its powerful hands and kneading him as it likes, the sovereign extends its arms over society as whole; it covers its surface with a network of small, complicated, painstaking, uniform rules through which the most original minds and the most vigorous souls cannot clear a way to surpass the crowd; it does not break wills, but softens them, bends them, and directs them; it rarely forces one to act, but it constantly opposes itself to one’s acting; it does not tyrannize, it hinders, compromises, enervates, extinguishes, dazes, and finally reduces each nation to being nothing more than a herd of timid and industrious animals of which the government is the shepherd.
Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America, volume 2, book 4, chapter 6
HT: Brad Hodges
[…] that our culture has a growing trend of leadership by smothering mothering. Recall this is just what Tocqueville prophesied. It is what I meant by “managerial” and “focus-group-tested” last week, and […]
Metábasis eis állo génos (5) | I gotta have my orange juice.
August 1, 2020 at 9:18 am
[…] about this. In the past, tyranny might be concentrated in a few individuals, but today’s soft despotism is much more diffuse and sMothering. Reaching back four years, Alastair Roberts had profound […]
Metábasis eis állo génos (17) | I gotta have my orange juice.
October 24, 2020 at 10:25 am
[…] I’ve been reflecting on how to convey what Edwin Friedman means by anxious leadership. He does not mean emotionally anxious, although that can accompany it. One possible way of expressing this is fussy leadership, obtrusive leadership, or even leadership that transgresses into another domain. It is similar to what R. C. Sproul means by “tyranny of the weak;” it is an excessive concern for the weak, anxious, or immature, employed as a kind of curb or constraint against those who are mature. Out in the world this looks like a hunt for bias, for the toxic. Within the church this looks like a hunt for pride. The result is a kind of Procrustean bed, or more accurately Harrison Bergeron. Ironically, by protecting the weak and anxious and immature from any inconvenience whatsoever—by fully enabling them to be their authentic selves—they are prevented from maturing. […]
Metábasis eis állo génos (20) | I gotta have my orange juice.
November 14, 2020 at 7:47 am
[…] EVERYONE KNOWS that the risk to grandma’s driving on the roads is so great that the ONLY SOLUTION is to drive 15mph OR you now have the option of dressing in bubble wrap. You could not possibly be loving your neighbor by attempting to deprive him of the soft despotism that will keep him “fixed irrevocably in childhood” (Tocqueville). […]
Metábasis eis állo génos (3-14) | I gotta have my orange juice.
April 2, 2022 at 9:02 am