Individualism and Materialism  Theme Analysis

For the purposes of discussing Tocqueville, individualism could be briefly defined as a focus on individual aims and beliefs over those of the collective. Today, Americans often think of individualism as working in tandem with liberty, but Tocqueville not only saw these two ideals as diametrically opposed, he also believed that individualism was one of the most negative and dangerous aspects of American democracy. Whereas Americans believed that individuals having the ability to strive for their own betterment was democratic and egalitarian, Tocqueville saw a world in which everyone was competing against each other for their own benefit, rather than for the benefit of society as a whole. By eroding social and political bonds between people, Tocqueville argues, individualism leads to a materialistic society of single-minded people striving toward wealth rather than the common good.

Contrasting individualistic American society with traditional, French aristocratic culture, Tocqueville notes that, in aristocratic societies, landowners are reliant on each other, on the king, and on those who labor for them. But in the democratic, egalitarian society of the United States, many people have become just stable enough to be able to rely on themselves alone. Today, as in Tocqueville’s time, Americans tend to view self-reliance as a virtue. But Tocqueville claims that the true virtue lies in needing to rely on other people, since doing so creates ethical bonds between citizens that can potentially expand outward, such that people can consider all their fellow countrymen—even those they haven’t personally relied on—as being connected to themselves. These social connections may be abstract, Tocqueville concedes, but for him that doesn’t mean they are artificial or inconsequential. Indeed, he criticizes what he characterizes as Americans’ tendency to privilege “natural” ties of the family over social ties of citizenship. And while “egoism” or selfishness has always existed, Tocqueville argues that it’s only when democracy creates the conditions for people to live self-sufficient lives that individualism might become a threat to the fabric of society.

Tocqueville also argues that individualism is directly tied to materialism, or the privileging of wealth and accumulation above all else. In some ways, Tocqueville does admire what he sees as Americans’ constant activity: their incessant desire to start new commercial enterprises and make more and more money for themselves. This is, after all, part of what has made America such a uniquely stable democracy. But Tocqueville is also suspicious of Americans’ dogged pursuit of wealth, seeing materialism as a moral and spiritual failing, but also a natural result of equality of condition. Even if everyone is given the same chances, he points out, American society still privileges those who work hardest and accumulate the most wealth (rather than those who are born with impressive titles). If materialism is therefore an inevitable result of democracy—and thus an inevitable aspect of France’s own future—Tocqueville believes this is an inherently troubling aspect to an otherwise positive system of governance.