Understanding the connection between philosophy and leading a meaningful life is a pursuit shared by many. However, the importance of Alexis de Tocqueville’s concept of mediocrity in democracy is often overlooked in this context. Gaining a clear understanding of this idea can significantly influence how philosophy is applied to enrich our lives. This article examines Alexis de Tocqueville’s philosophy, the notion of mediocrity in democracy, and their relevance to the quest for a more meaningful existence.
Key features of Alexis de Tocqueville’s philosophy
Alexis de Tocqueville was a French political thinker and historian best known for his work Democracy in America, where he analyzed the strengths and weaknesses of democratic systems. One of Tocqueville’s key ideas was that democracy thrives when people actively participate in civic life and maintain a strong sense of community. He believed that equality was a defining feature of democracy, but he also warned that it could lead to the rise of mediocrity or excessive individualism if not balanced with a commitment to the common good.
Tocqueville championed the importance of institutions and freedoms, such as free speech and an independent judiciary, which protect people from the tyranny of the majority. He emphasized that a healthy democracy requires educated citizens who can make informed decisions, as well as a vibrant civil society where individuals collaborate on shared goals. Tocqueville also noted the role of religion in supporting moral values while advocating for a secular government.
Underpinning his philosophy was a deep understanding of human nature and the inherent tension between freedom and equality. He believed that democracy, despite its flaws, had the unique ability to adapt and improve over time. Tocqueville’s ideas remain relevant today, offering timeless lessons about the challenges and opportunities of democratic governance.
What is mediocrity in democracy?
Alexis de Tocqueville believed that democracy has a tendency to lead to a state of mediocrity among its citizens. He suggested that in democratic societies, there is often an emphasis on equality, and this can result in a collective pursuit of common or average standards. Tocqueville observed that people in democracies tend to value conformity and shared norms, which might discourage exceptional achievements or extraordinary talents. This is because standing out or striving to be significantly different can create discomfort or envy in a society that prioritizes equality.
Additionally, Tocqueville argued that mediocrity in democracy arises because the system encourages individuals to focus on their own private lives rather than on collective ambitions or higher intellectual pursuits. Democratic societies often prioritise the practical and immediate over the exceptional and long-term. This can foster a culture where individuals are less inclined to take risks or aim for greatness, as their energies are directed toward maintaining their equality and personal comfort.
Tocqueville pointed out that the pull toward mediocrity is not necessarily due to a lack of ability or ambition but rather reflects a broader social dynamic within democracy itself. He believed that this pursuit of equality shapes the way people think and act, reinforcing behaviours and choices that align with the average, rather than the exceptional.
This example helps to demonstrate this philosophical perspective. Imagine a democratic society where the majority rules in decision-making, and the focus is placed on equality above all else. Alexis de Tocqueville observed that this emphasis on equality can sometimes encourage a culture where mediocrity thrives, as individuals may become hesitant to stand out or excel for fear of disrupting the status quo. For instance, in such a society, businesses may prioritize practices that cater to average tastes and preferences rather than pursuing innovative or groundbreaking ideas. Similarly, citizens might lean toward conformity, avoiding bold or unconventional opinions that challenge the majority. While this pursuit of equality ensures fairness, it can also create an environment where only average standards are maintained, limiting potential for greatness or exceptional achievement. This scenario captures the subtle balance between maintaining equality and fostering individual excellence within a democratic framework.
Challenges to Alexis de Tocqueville’s view about mediocrity in democracy
Some philosophers object to or reject Alexis de Tocqueville’s view about mediocrity in democracy because they see it as an overly negative or incomplete critique of democratic societies. One common disagreement comes from the belief that democracy does not inherently lead to mediocrity but instead provides opportunities for individuals to excel based on merit. Critics argue that the democratic system promotes equality of opportunity, which allows talent, creativity, and innovation to thrive rather than being suppressed or reduced to mediocrity.
Another perspective comes from those who reject the idea that democratic systems inherently diminish excellence. These philosophers suggest that what might appear as mediocrity could actually be a broader distribution of power and resources, enabling more people to contribute meaningfully to society. They point out that historical evidence shows many democratic societies excelling in arts, science, and human progress, which would not align with the notion of mediocrity. For these thinkers, democracy, far from fostering mediocrity, encourages collaboration, diversity, and intellectual growth.
Some also take issue with what they see as an unfair generalization in Tocqueville’s critique. They argue that mediocrity is not a problem unique to democracies but can be found in different forms across all types of societies. For instance, aristocracies and dictatorships can also suppress creativity and innovation due to rigid hierarchies or excessive control. By attributing mediocrity primarily to democracy, these philosophers feel that Tocqueville overlooks flaws that exist in other systems of governance.
Finally, some reject the idea on moral or ethical grounds, arguing that democracy’s primary goal is not to produce an elite class of exceptional individuals but to promote fairness, equality, and the general well-being of all citizens. Even if certain systems might create space for extreme excellence, philosophers focused on the values of justice and human dignity suggest that democracy’s focus on balancing varied perspectives and interests is inherently superior to systems that favor a select few. These objections highlight the belief that Tocqueville’s view may undermine the broader values and aspirations of democratic governance.
Why mediocrity in democracy is important to Alexis de Tocqueville’s philosophy
Understanding the concept of mediocrity in democracy is essential to gaining insight into Alexis de Tocqueville’s philosophy.
- Equality as a Foundational Principle
One reason the idea of mediocrity in democracy is important is that it highlights democracy’s focus on equality among its citizens. Democracies emphasize the idea that every individual should have equal rights, opportunities, and access to influence decisions. This focus on equality often diminishes the emphasis on exceptionalism or extraordinary talent, as the system works to maintain fairness for all rather than favouring a select few. By prioritizing equality, democratic societies aim to create a level playing field where no one is inherently superior or inferior to another. This principle helps to explain why mediocrity might emerge as a byproduct of trying to maintain balance among all members of society.
- Distribution of Power
Another reason is the way democracy decentralizes and distributes power across a broad population, in contrast to systems that concentrate power in the hands of a few elites. This widespread sharing of power means that leadership roles and decision-making responsibilities are often accessible to a wide range of people, not necessarily those with the highest levels of expertise or exceptional capabilities. By making positions of influence open to many, democracy inherently values the collective contribution of average individuals over the singular brilliance of a few. This approach underlines the idea of mediocrity as part of the democratic effort to reflect and represent the broader population.
- Fostering Social Cohesion
The concept of mediocrity in democracy also emphasizes the importance of social cohesion and unity. Democracies depend on cooperation and compromise among diverse groups of people, and encouraging mediocrity can reduce tensions caused by excessive competition or inequality. By valuing the “average,” democracies create an environment where people feel included and are less likely to resent or oppose one another. This sense of belonging and mutual respect is crucial for maintaining stability and preventing divisions within a society. Thus, mediocrity can be seen as a mechanism that reinforces harmony and collective identity in a democratic framework.
Contrasting Alexis de Tocqueville’s philosophy with Aristotle’s philosophy
Alexis de Tocqueville and Aristotle had differing views on democracy, especially when it comes to the concept of mediocrity. Aristotle, in his philosophy, expressed concerns about democracy because he believed it could lead to mob rule and the tyranny of an uninformed majority. He argued that democracy, unless balanced, could devolve into a system where decisions are made based on the whims of the masses rather than on reason or virtue. For Aristotle, the ideal government was one that aimed for the common good and was led by those who possessed wisdom and virtue – an aristocracy or polity where power was distributed wisely.
On the other hand, Tocqueville’s observations on democracy in America highlighted his concerns about the risk of mediocrity within a democratic society. While he admired democracy for its strengths, he noted that equality, if overemphasized, could stifle excellence and discourage individual ambition. This contrasts with Aristotle’s focus, as Aristotle’s critique of democracy was more rooted in its potential for irrationality and instability among the masses rather than a decline into mediocrity. Tocqueville’s thoughts show a modern nuance, as he explored how democratic equality could unintentionally lower intellectual and cultural standards. Together, their philosophies offer different but complementary critiques of the democratic system, reflecting the challenges of balancing equality with virtue and individual excellence.
Mediocrity In Democracy, Alexis de Tocqueville’s philosophy and the meaning of life
Reflecting on Alexis de Tocqueville’s perspective invites us to think deeper about how we engage with the structures of society and make meaning in our lives. Whether or not one agrees with his views about mediocrity in democracy, the act of considering such ideas holds practical relevance. It serves as a reminder that our personal values and actions are not isolated but intertwined with the broader systems in which we live. Tocqueville’s work encourages us to be vigilant about how these systems shape our expectations, decisions, and ambitions.
Focusing on these reflections can inspire us to resist passivity and strive for excellence in our personal and professional pursuits. Instead of succumbing to complacency or societal norms that may limit aspirations, we can consciously decide to pursue goals that foster personal growth and contribute positively to others. This mindset encourages us to take ownership of how we define success and fulfillment rather than allowing external forces to dictate them.
Additionally, thinking critically about such philosophical views nudges us to examine the role of individual responsibility and community. Living a meaningful life often means balancing personal priorities with the opportunities and challenges presented by the collective. Tocqueville’s ideas challenge us to consider whether we are actively participating in shaping our world or simply adapting to its rhythms. This reflection can lead to greater mindfulness, ensuring that we are deliberate in how we live rather than being swept along by routines or the status quo.
Ultimately, reflecting on such broader ideas encourages curiosity and a habit of learning. These habits can deepen our understanding of ourselves and the world around us, empowering us to make choices that align with our core values. Whether we agree or disagree with Tocqueville, engaging with his ideas can serve as a meaningful exercise in self-awareness and critical thinking. These are essential tools for anyone committed to creating a purposeful and fulfilling life.
Further reading
de Tocqueville, A. (2000). Democracy in America (H. C. Mansfield & D. Winthrop, Trans.). University of Chicago Press. (Original work published 1835).
Arendt, H. (1958). The human condition. University of Chicago Press.
Kirk, R. (1982). The conservative mind: From Burke to Eliot. Regnery Gateway.
Mill, J. S. (2001). On liberty. Batoche Books. (Original work published 1859).
Rosanvallon, P. (2008). Democracy past and future. Columbia University Press.
Wolin, S. S. (1960). Politics and vision: Continuity and innovation in Western political thought. Princeton University Press.
Zuckert, C. H. (1994). Natural rights and the new republicanism. Princeton University Press.