In chapter six of his book, Tocqueville, discusses that in America people respect and obey the law because laws somewhat reflect everyone's views.
"In the United States, excepting slaves, domestics, and indigents nourished by the townships, there is no one who is not an elector, and whoever has this title concurs indirectly in the law...that in the United States each finds a sort personal interest in everyone's obeying the laws..."(Tocqueville 230).
I find this passage interesting because in my personal views I believe that most laws do not reflect the views of the majority. Marxists would argue that the laws in America reflect the views of the minority (those in power) and this might explain why America has high crime rates because people disobey the laws at all times and they get punished for it. I wonder what others think about this?
"In the United States, excepting slaves, domestics, and indigents nourished by the townships, there is no one who is not an elector, and whoever has this title concurs indirectly in the law...that in the United States each finds a sort personal interest in everyone's obeying the laws..."(Tocqueville 230).
I find this passage interesting because in my personal views I believe that most laws do not reflect the views of the majority. Marxists would argue that the laws in America reflect the views of the minority (those in power) and this might explain why America has high crime rates because people disobey the laws at all times and they get punished for it. I wonder what others think about this?
Let's keep the times in mind. When Tocqueville was writing, America probably did have a low crime rate relative to The Continent. Certainly the way in which laws are made in America, and the types of laws that are made has drastically changed in the past 150 years. Probably the crime rate has gone up since Mr. T wrote. (As pure speculation) I would not be surprised if an increasingly elite political class, dictatorially handing down laws from on high sans participation of the average citizen, could create two effects. Either 1)the laws become no longer indicative of general sentiments, or 2) the absence of democratic (not republican) participation creates certain feelings of disenfranchisement (or lessened feelings of personal investment relative to our forefathers) and higher rates of attrition. I would also examine the perceived role of law, the way in which laws are seen to be treated by the government, and the punishments given to crimes.
Monsieur Tocqueville acknowledges the absence of crime, interestingly Seymour Martin Lipset, writing in 1996, comments on this evolution of respect for authority. While Tocqueville evaluated American democracy in its early stages, in which the laws of the land most certainly reflected the will of each man, and the taste of tyranny was still fresh, Americans acknowledged those laws as their own, and saw their power to alter them if needed.
Lipset comments, "the American revolutionary libertarian tradition does not encourage obedience to the state and the law." This shift may simply be a demonstration of the disdain for current laws that do not reflect the will of the people, and also perhaps the reflection of an American ideal that is, "government of the people, by the people."
Two things:
1) Very interesting that you would bring up lack of representation in laws. In a Congressional Institutions class that several of us in this lecture are taking, we just covered a section on MC funding, particularly the fact that candidates receive their money from PACs, or that a good portion of their funding from individual donors comes from outside the MC's own district and/or state. I often question HOW laws are a democratic reflection of American society when they can, in a sense, be bought by elites NOT represented by the candidate and special interest groups.
2) I wonder how much reported crime rates differ from actual crime... for instance, I just read a UN report that assigned many western nations with reported incidents of crime in the thousands and tens of thousands, yet Italy only had 4 reported incidents; I think this says more about how crime is monitored in Italy rather than indicating a society that has lower crime rates than England or the UK. I'm sure there are people in this class who know more about this than I do, so any insight/comments on the issue would be more than welcome.