Neitzsch

Tocqueville and Hartz v. Madis Neitzsch

Seminar paper from the year 2006 in the subject Politics - Political Theory and the History of Ideas Journal, grade: 1,3, Dresden Technical University (Institut für Politikwissenschaft), course: Political Ideas and Political Institutions in the United States, 4 entries in the bibliography, language: English, comment: This essay discusses the question whether - regarding the United States in the late eighteenth and nineteenth centuries - we should consider that political values or political institutions were more responsible for the maintenance of democratic practices. For this purpose the arguments of Madison, Tocqueville and Hartz are reconsidered. , abstract: This essay discusses the question whether - regarding the United States in the late 18th and 19th centuries - we should consider that political values or political institutions were more responsible for the maintenance of democratic practices. For this purpose the arguments of Madison, Tocqueville and Hartz are reconsidered. Since the fall of Rome there was no long lasting democracy in the history of mankind, though there had been several attempts to establish one, all failed in terms of duration. So the founding fathers of the American Constitution in the late 18th century were deeply concerned about the possible failure of the young democracy. So far all empirical evidence supported Platon's teachings of a cycle of returning political regimes that led inevitably from democracy to oligarchy to dictatorship and again to monarchy. The construction of a political system that was both democratic and stable had never worked before. So the main question of this essay, whether political values or political institutions were more responsible for the maintenance of democratic practices, was essential to the people of that time. The Federalists' most important question is: How can one create a stable political order that is still free and democratic? Their answer is: By carefully constructing the political instit