Tocqueville's Postmodernism
By Carol Browning
Equality is not a common word in contemporary society. There are equal-opportunity employers and equal-housing lenders and such, but as an ideal itself, equality is not often preached. Its place has been taken by such other virtues as freedom, diversity, and non-partisanship. When Alexis de Tocqueville, in the wake of European revolutions, wrote Democracy in America, he said as much about American equality as democracy. What, then, has happened to equality in the intervening decades?
It is undeniable that, at least politically, Americans are far more equal today than they were in the early 1800s. Though it has taken almost two centuries since its founding for America to finally rid itself of officially-sanctioned racism and sexism, it has been a steady development throughout her history. There are still quibbles over affirmative action and gender gaps, but it is obvious that equality has not ever had a surer hold on a people than in America of the twenty-first century.
Yet our society is again in the midst of major cultural change. The last century brought Western culture to the tragic but logical conclusion of rationalist modernity, and in response to this, the postmodern phenomenon has risen in its place. With it have come new ideas on government, society, and equality.
Equality in twenty-first century America is moving beyond modernism. Having largely achieved personal and political equality for every citizen, the cultural mood is moving towards egalitarianism on a deeper, more philosophical level. For 200 years, it could be honestly said of America that here '"the precepts of Descartes are least studied and best followed" (Democracy in America, 403). While that statement described a historical America, it is not a sufficient description of the America that is coming to be.
Disillusioned with the rationalistic search for ultimate truth that pervaded the modernist mindset, postmoderns are not concerned with finding a single, unifying ideal or any kind of sure method for perfecting society. Thus, it does not fluster them in the least to hold to a relativistic sort of equality—philosophi-
cal egalitarianism rather than a political one. They gain this equality by decreeing that all beliefs, values, viewpoints and opinions are specific to one's immediate community, and all are equally valid. If there is no single unifying Truth, then all standards are equally true. This is the equality meant when spoken of with other words, like "diversity" and "tolerance." This is the equality of our generation.
Were Tocqueville to turn his perceptive eye upon our current cultural situation, I believe he would have treated the matter the same way he treated the philosophical and cultural changes of his own turbulent day. The democratic revolutions were certain and necessary historical developments—larger and more violent, to be sure, than most bends in history's course, but inevitable nonetheless. Tocqueville saw the uselessness, on one hand, of condemning and eschewing the uncomfortable changes in society, and the folly on the other of recklessly abandoning oneself to the enthusiastic bandwagon of revolution. In other words, he sympathized with the old order, but wisely sought to give sober attention to the new one that was taking over his world. This, I believe, would be his attitude were he to evaluate contemporary American society.
Postmodernism is bringing a different flavor of equality to our society, but Tocqueville would not see this as reason to expend effort to stop the change. Rather than crying over the death of modernity, he would instead make an effort to discover the characteristics of postmodern ideals, analyze them, and respond with encouragements for their benefits and warnings against potential pitfalls. This is the general principle held throughout Democracy in America. With regard to postmodernism in particular, however, I believe the argument can be taken further.
In a certain sense, Tocqueville can himself be seen as an early herald of postmodernism. In warning of the dangers of unchecked equality and individualism, he was also critiquing the overall philosophy of modernistic rationalism. The democratic revolutions—including the founding of America—were the children of modernitv. whether the modernity of the Enlightenment or of the Reformation. Thus in warning against the pitfalls of equality, he was likewise showing his misgivings against modernity as a whole. As far as postmodernism exists as a reaction against and corrective to the errors of modernity, Tocqueville was postmodern, for he saw the same problems. This is evidenced in the solutions he offers as preventives against an overly egalitarian regime. Notice that his great hope for America lay not in her meticulously and rationally planned government, nor in her equality of conditions, nor in her democratic birth. He saw private social institutions as the safeguard of American society - a communal, non-rational solution to the excesses of alienating, reason-based egalitarianism (DA II 2.4-5). It is safe to say that of all the characteristics of postmodernism, Tocqueville would probably find himself most pleased with its affinity for community. That is not to say that Tocqueville would be happy with the overall state of equality in postmodern America. When reality is reduced to opinion, and equality of
viewpoint no longer refers to the freedom of a person to hold any view, but rather to the equal epistemo-logical legitimacy of any view, then all excuse for passionate belief is eroded. Yet Tocqueville foresaw this too, as he aptly describes equality's last men: "... a herd of timid and industrious animals of which the government is the shepherd" (DA 663). This passage is rightly famous, for it shows us ourselves with sharp familiarity.
Equality is a word that changes in meaning as it changes historical eras. An attempt at quantitative comparison of this ideal in different eras cannot escape the fact that "equality" signifies something radically different to a twenty-first century postmodern than it did to an eighteenth century revolutionary. Yet, as Tocqueville showed, there is hope to be found in any generation—it is not discovered in the past, though history may guide, but rather in sober guidance of the future.
Equality is not a common word in contemporary society. There are equal-opportunity employers and equal-housing lenders and such, but as an ideal itself, equality is not often preached. Its place has been taken by such other virtues as freedom, diversity, and non-partisanship. When Alexis de Tocqueville, in the wake of European revolutions, wrote Democracy in America, he said as much about American equality as democracy. What, then, has happened to equality in the intervening decades?
It is undeniable that, at least politically, Americans are far more equal today than they were in the early 1800s. Though it has taken almost two centuries since its founding for America to finally rid itself of officially-sanctioned racism and sexism, it has been a steady development throughout her history. There are still quibbles over affirmative action and gender gaps, but it is obvious that equality has not ever had a surer hold on a people than in America of the twenty-first century.
Yet our society is again in the midst of major cultural change. The last century brought Western culture to the tragic but logical conclusion of rationalist modernity, and in response to this, the postmodern phenomenon has risen in its place. With it have come new ideas on government, society, and equality.
Equality in twenty-first century America is moving beyond modernism. Having largely achieved personal and political equality for every citizen, the cultural mood is moving towards egalitarianism on a deeper, more philosophical level. For 200 years, it could be honestly said of America that here '"the precepts of Descartes are least studied and best followed" (Democracy in America, 403). While that statement described a historical America, it is not a sufficient description of the America that is coming to be.
Disillusioned with the rationalistic search for ultimate truth that pervaded the modernist mindset, postmoderns are not concerned with finding a single, unifying ideal or any kind of sure method for perfecting society. Thus, it does not fluster them in the least to hold to a relativistic sort of equality—philosophi-
cal egalitarianism rather than a political one. They gain this equality by decreeing that all beliefs, values, viewpoints and opinions are specific to one's immediate community, and all are equally valid. If there is no single unifying Truth, then all standards are equally true. This is the equality meant when spoken of with other words, like "diversity" and "tolerance." This is the equality of our generation.
Were Tocqueville to turn his perceptive eye upon our current cultural situation, I believe he would have treated the matter the same way he treated the philosophical and cultural changes of his own turbulent day. The democratic revolutions were certain and necessary historical developments—larger and more violent, to be sure, than most bends in history's course, but inevitable nonetheless. Tocqueville saw the uselessness, on one hand, of condemning and eschewing the uncomfortable changes in society, and the folly on the other of recklessly abandoning oneself to the enthusiastic bandwagon of revolution. In other words, he sympathized with the old order, but wisely sought to give sober attention to the new one that was taking over his world. This, I believe, would be his attitude were he to evaluate contemporary American society.
Postmodernism is bringing a different flavor of equality to our society, but Tocqueville would not see this as reason to expend effort to stop the change. Rather than crying over the death of modernity, he would instead make an effort to discover the characteristics of postmodern ideals, analyze them, and respond with encouragements for their benefits and warnings against potential pitfalls. This is the general principle held throughout Democracy in America. With regard to postmodernism in particular, however, I believe the argument can be taken further.
In a certain sense, Tocqueville can himself be seen as an early herald of postmodernism. In warning of the dangers of unchecked equality and individualism, he was also critiquing the overall philosophy of modernistic rationalism. The democratic revolutions—including the founding of America—were the children of modernitv. whether the modernity of the Enlightenment or of the Reformation. Thus in warning against the pitfalls of equality, he was likewise showing his misgivings against modernity as a whole. As far as postmodernism exists as a reaction against and corrective to the errors of modernity, Tocqueville was postmodern, for he saw the same problems. This is evidenced in the solutions he offers as preventives against an overly egalitarian regime. Notice that his great hope for America lay not in her meticulously and rationally planned government, nor in her equality of conditions, nor in her democratic birth. He saw private social institutions as the safeguard of American society - a communal, non-rational solution to the excesses of alienating, reason-based egalitarianism (DA II 2.4-5). It is safe to say that of all the characteristics of postmodernism, Tocqueville would probably find himself most pleased with its affinity for community. That is not to say that Tocqueville would be happy with the overall state of equality in postmodern America. When reality is reduced to opinion, and equality of
viewpoint no longer refers to the freedom of a person to hold any view, but rather to the equal epistemo-logical legitimacy of any view, then all excuse for passionate belief is eroded. Yet Tocqueville foresaw this too, as he aptly describes equality's last men: "... a herd of timid and industrious animals of which the government is the shepherd" (DA 663). This passage is rightly famous, for it shows us ourselves with sharp familiarity.
Equality is a word that changes in meaning as it changes historical eras. An attempt at quantitative comparison of this ideal in different eras cannot escape the fact that "equality" signifies something radically different to a twenty-first century postmodern than it did to an eighteenth century revolutionary. Yet, as Tocqueville showed, there is hope to be found in any generation—it is not discovered in the past, though history may guide, but rather in sober guidance of the future.
posted by Tim Hoskins at 5:00 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home