Chapters 1 & 2
The concept of fear as a series of traceable ideas through history is hope-inspiring. If political fear is something that has left a trail of breadcrumb-like ideologies through the generations, then it may be possible to observe the progression and gain control over the metaphysics of political fear today. This possibility provides a sense that perhaps, one day, political fear will lose its usefulness in defining the morality of a time. Perhaps, one day, if the evolution of political fear can be understood, then its necessity can be better appreciated, and the wild reactions to the emotion people experience can be brought to manageable levels.
A point is made in these chapters about how fear of the social anxiety experienced at the beginning of democracy is responsible for the institutions and civic associations that were developed to assuage.
What this point drives home is that all political action, and perhaps even life itself, is driven by fear and that it is the quality of that fear that will determine the effects of the acts it inspires. This point-of-view suggests not that we should attempt to resolve all of our fears, but experience their consequences, and decide whether those consequences should be feared. It is an infinite progression and one that is outlined in these chapters through reference to influential political thinkers.
One thing these chapters leave me contemplating is whether or not, today, we still maintain our society through mutual fear of one another. Part of me believes that we might be approaching a time in which mutual fear is no longer the glue that holds our society together, but instead a shared belief in our ability to gain from one another. I do not think this idea is new. I simply believe that the radius of our belief in mutual benefit has lengthened from an experience shared within families and close friends, to an ideal that extends to the country, the democratic, the globe over.
Chapter 3
It is amazing to read about the beginnings of democracy as it was being reintroduced to the world in the 18th Century. Reading about how, in France, political upheavals and formations took shape at an unprecedented pace is interesting, but never before had I thought about what it must have been like to be a member of the lower classes, “the mob,” and for the first time in history have an opportunity to participate in politics at all.
Before this time, politics was a royal affair, and during it, a human one.
The anxiety of the masses generating the actions of the leaders of the world is not a new event, as it is described in this book.
Through civilizations of every order, leaders have had to submit to the will and quell the anxieties of their people.
Perhaps it is true the varnish of royalty and aristocracy was, in the 18th Century, stripped away from this reality, leaving it bare for the masses, and the government, to observe.
Tocqueville describes the masses, the majority, as suffering from some sort of glob-like lack of definition. I wonder what kind of political refinements Tocqueville perceived the masses as having before the democratic revolutions of the 18th Century. Is it possible that this thinker overlooked the reality that the lower classes, the mob, that was now finally being paid political attention to, had never had the luxury of refining their ideologies? His manner of thinking on this matter is baffling. The purpose of the democratic revolutions was to provide an ear to the grumblings of the great majority. These people had no opportunity to understand their pains and desires with language. What they knew came from the blackness of their inner lives.