Texte remanié de: Th. doct.--Litt. française--Paris 7, 1998. Titre de soutenance : Tocqueville, écrivain "De la démocratie en Amérique. / Bibliogr. p. 415-429. Index.

Thèse--Droit--Paris, 1910.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of North Texas, Dec., 2009. / Title from title page display. Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis--Catholic University of America. / Bibliography: p. 189-194.

Thesis--Cologne. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 152-167).

Mémoire (Ph.D.)Université de Lille, 1965). / "Une édition électronique réalisée à partir de l'article de Jean Michel Leclercq, Les études canadiennes d'Alexis de Tocqueville. Mémoire pour le diplôme d'études supérieures de sciences politiques,, Faculté de droit et de sciences économiques de Lille,,1965, 104 pp." Titre de l'écran-titre (visionné le 3 avril 2007). Publié aussi en version papier.

Th.--Lett.--Paris 4, 1982.

This thesis explores Alexis de Tocqueville’s representation of Indigenous peoples in his book Democracy in America, a subject largely overlooked in the history of Tocqueville scholarship. I argue that his narrative on the history of American expansionism creates a simulacrum of Indigeneity as a rhetorical trope to convince the reader of the impossibility of the resurrection of European feudalism. In the process he exposes the brutality of American decadence while paradoxically endorsing the principles that motivate European colonialism. Tocqueville’s historical narrative essentially writes Indigenous people out of history and offers a tacit justification for some of the injustices they suffered. Although some modern scholars read him as a critic of American tyranny, I suggest that his juxtaposition of savagism and civilization presupposes a progressive concept of history that condemns Indigenous peoples to an unavoidable destruction. / Thesis / Master of Arts (MA) / This thesis examines the way that Alexis de Tocqueville misrepresents the history of Indigenous peoples in his book Democracy in America. I argue that his discussion on the history of American colonialism depicts Indigenous peoples in a way that fails to appreciate their culture and suggests that their destruction is simply the tragic result of the triumphant march of European civilization. I also argue that, for Tocqueville, the democratic movement in Europe is an historical inevitability that is impossible to resist.

According to Alexis de Tocqueville, humanity is entering a new age of political and social equality, a new epoch in which the human race has no historical example or experience. As a result, he holds humanity's future will be largely determined by the political and moral choices made in this transitional time. For Tocqueville, the new egalitarian era is a forgone conclusion, but for him, the pressing question is whether humanity will choose a future in which it enchains itself to new forms of tyranny, or, whether the human race can establish the political and moral institutions designed to assure human freedom and dignity. In Tocqueville's view, liberty or slavery are the two choices modern men and women have in front of them, and it is the intent of this dissertation to explore Tocqueville's warning in regard to the latter choice. Tocqueville warns us that modern democratic peoples must beware of the moral and political effects of a new type of political philosophy, a political theory he terms democratic pantheism. Democratic pantheism is a philosophic doctrine that treats egalitarianism as a "religion" in which all social and political striving is directed toward realizing a providentially ordained strict equality of conditions. To attain this end, modern humanity gives up its right to self-government to an all-powerful "representative" state that will unconsciously (and as a result, unjustly) force equality on unequal human beings. Because this philosophy informs the core "soul" of a pantheistic social state, the vast majority of individuals are blissfully unaware that their humanity is diminished and their freedom is lost. The effect is a political and intellectual torpor wherein democratic citizens fall prey to a deterministic and insipid existence; and any thoughts of true independence and freedom of action are eventually extinguished--all due to the unknowing acceptance of a hidden social and political philosophy.

Thesis advisor: Robert K. Faulkner / Why are men in modern societies so busy and anxious? Modern, liberal democratic society is distinguished both by the unprecedented strength and prosperity it has achieved, as well as its remarkable number of psychologists per capita. Why is this? This dissertation explores the connection between restlessness and modernity by way of an examination of the themes of liberalism and restlessness in the thought of Locke and Tocqueville. "Restlessness" refers to a way of life characterized by three features: limitless desires, mildness, and an orientation towards material goods. Tocqueville argues in <italic>Democracy in America<italic> that democracy, by way of individualism, makes men materialistic and restless (<italic>inquiét<italic>), or restlessly materialistic. The intense, limitless pursuit of material well-being is a historical phenomenon, one of the many results of the centuries-long development of equality of conditions. Modern democrats are restless; pre-modern aristocrats were not. Tocqueville is ambivalent about restlessness. According to him, the incessant, energetic movement of American life conceals an underlying absurdity and mediocrity. Many of what Tocqueville views as the more undesirable qualities of democratic American life are associated with restlessness, but any solution is likely to be worse than the problem. It could be worse: we must tolerate restlessness if we want to remain free. "All free peoples are grave." Locke by contrast could be described as a partisan of restlessness. The anxious understand the world better than the complacent or vegetative. There are two dimensions to Locke's teaching on restlessness, an "is" (found in <italic>Essay concerning Human Understanding<italic> Book II Chapter 21) and an "ought" (found in "Of Property," Chapter Five of the <italic>Second Treatise<italic>). Our desires are naturally limitless-this we can only understand, we cannot change it. But if we know what's good for us, we will orient ourselves towards a milder and more materialistic way of life. We master restlessness by becoming more restless, or restless in a more enlightened way. Locke's teaching on restlessness in the fullest sense is partly his account of necessity, and partly his recommended response to necessity. This difference in their views on restlessness points to certain important differences in their liberalisms. Tocqueville's liberalism is more pessimistic than Locke's: some fundamental problems have no solutions, and some of the highest goods cannot be reconciled with one another. Lockean liberalism is more confident about its ability to find solutions to the fundamental problems of political life, and there is no problem of the harmony of the goods for Locke. / Thesis (PhD) — Boston College, 2010. / Submitted to: Boston College. Graduate School of Arts and Sciences. / Discipline: Political Science.