Coursehero >> Colorado >> Colorado >> SOCY 4461

Course Hero has millions of student submitted documents similar to the one below including study guides, practice problems, reference materials, practice exams, textbook help and tutor support.

Luis Monroy February 19, 2008 SOCY 4461: Professor Isaac Reed The Conflict between Capitalism and Democracy American politics centers itself around the appraisal of two specific ideals: democracy and capitalism. No matter how divided the two political parties in the American government become, the unrelenting appraisal for these two ideals never wavers. However, it is ironic that these ideals are cherished in American society so greatly when they are somewhat clashing ideas. An obviously inherent piece of the democratic ideal is equality, and an equally obvious piece of the capitalistic ideal is inequality. So, how is it that a modern society such as America has survived so long with these conflicting principles? By synthesizing Alexis de Tocqueville's study of <a href="/keyword/democracy-in-america/" >democracy in america</a> with Max Weber's The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism one can understand that while America prides itself on both principles, democracy is many times lessened because of the spirit of capitalism. The importance that Americans place <a href="/keyword/on-liberty/" >on liberty</a> , money, and religion create the unique mindset necessary to hold the often conflicting ideas of capitalism and democracy as equally important principles in thought, but make capitalism more powerful in practice. The concept of liberty in American society today is a mostly liberal definition of the term in that the American ideal of liberty is seen as the ability to have free will. The socialist definition, on the other hand, associates liberty with equality in terms of wealth. This is an obviously clear violation of the strong spirit of capitalism, so it can be thrown out. However, according to de Tocqueville, the liberal definition is slightly different from the phenomenon of American liberty. His thesis centralizes on the idea that American democracy has emerged through a few aspects, but one being this uniquely American view of liberty. De Tocqueville describes the reasoning for this difference because &quot;in America, on the other hand, it may be said that the township was organized before the county, the county before the State, the State before the Union.&quot;1 This uniquely American liberty is important in that instead of a centralized government trying to impose its beliefs on the people, as was the case in many European countries, the American people were deciding their own liberties on a communal level rather than national. This has led to Americans identifying themselves within both a national context and in a state context. The deviated self regarding a split in nationalism is a completely unique aspect of American modernity and its idea of liberty. While Weber never specifies specifically on the topic of liberty in The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, his thesis offers some insights on the topic. Weber states that our ability to act through free will, or as aforementioned our liberty, is constantly impeded by the system of capitalism. He states that because of capitalism, people's devotion to their work is &quot;so irrational from the standpoint of purely eudemonistic self-interest, but has been and still is one of the most characteristic elements of our capitalistic culture.&quot;2 In other words, capitalism seems like a rational system, and therefore people became involved with it. However, capitalism then consumes people's lives and they only live to fulfill their work and in doing so, the system becomes irrational. The basis of Weber's book then turns to finding the origins of the capitalistic system and the people who originally thought that it was rational. But it is important to note here that with capitalism running the lives of Americans, the ability of liberty would almost certainly be lessened. It is here that Weber puts into terms specifically why democracy and capitalism should be conflicting ideas in a society. 1 2 De Tocqueville, Alexis. <a href="/keyword/democracy-in-america/" >democracy in america</a> Vol. I. Translated by Henry Reeve. 1835. P. 13. Weber, Max. The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. Translated by Talcott Parsons. New York: 1958. Dover Edition: P. 78. Therefore, how is it possible that Americans can cherish their liberty so greatly according to de Tocqueville, but give a lot of it up to the spirit of capitalism according to Weber? It seems that the American liberty professed for by its citizens is a completely unique perception of liberty. One aspect of it was described above in the split self regarding ideas of patriotism and nationalism. However, the most important aspect seems to be that Americans will cherish liberty for every aspect of their lives, except economically. America has been built on the belief that an individual should be able to choose what path they take in life, with the exception that because of capitalism, there are heavy limitations <a href="/keyword/on-liberty/" >on liberty</a> regarding the work force. This is also ironic in that according to Weber, the economic sector commands each citizen's entire life under a capitalistic system. The effect that this system has on America seems to be very efficient for bureaucracy. Americans have a strong sense of nationalism based on their pride of the great liberties that they share, and therefore want America to prosper. The way in which this is done is to enter into the capitalistic system and work for the country. However, then the capitalistic system entangles the citizen into becoming a physical embodiment of his or her work, and nothing more. One could infer that one reason the elite in America have thrived so incredibly in the past century is, in part, because of this system. It is also safe to assume that this system is fairly undemocratic in that there is a small group of people (capitalists) who are able to shape the mentalities and workmanship of the American population. However, it is important to note that Weber does not place blame on individuals in that he perceives the capitalistic system to be a self-maintaining entity. Weber describes the process by which this happens as &quot;a process of economic survival of the fittest.&quot;3 For this system to work, there must be a very high status placed on money within American society. The status placed on money must be so high that to the individual citizens the 3 Ibid, P. 55. negatives of becoming undifferentiated from one's work do not outweigh the positives of making more money. Weber states the phenomenon after using the autobiography of Benjamin Franklin as the prime example of how Americans interact with money. He synthesizes Franklin by stating &quot;man is dominated by the making of money, by acquisition as the ultimate purpose of his life.&quot; 4 He describes that only in American society is the idea prevalent that money does not need to be spent, but rather is simply a means to gain more money that does not have to be spent. It is safe to assume that if money is in fact the ultimate purpose for the American's life, the system of capitalism has succeeded greatly in creating an atmosphere in which people would be willing to give up their economic liberty for the well being of the capitalistic system. An important side effect of capitalism being such an essential piece in the American's lives is the effect that is has on the democratic process. In the early 19 th century when de Tocqueville travelled to America, he made an important point about the state of equality present within the country at the time. When discussing what happened to the families of the founding fathers he says &quot;most of them have lapsed into obscurity. The last trace of hereditary ranks and distinctions is destroyed--the law of partition has reduced all to one level.&quot;5 It appears that in this statement de Tocqueville is implying that America is becoming a completely egalitarian society, including economically. Perhaps this would have been the case, but in the next paragraph de Tocqueville clarifies the uniqueness of the American situation by saying &quot;I do not mean that there is any deficiency of wealthy individuals in the United States; I know of no country, indeed, where the love of money has taken stronger hold on the affections of men, and where the profounder contempt is expressed for the theory of the permanent equality of 4 5 Ibid. P. 53. De Tocqueville. P. 21 property.&quot;6 This again suggests how the American ideal is to have an equal democracy in every sector except the economic one. It is interesting to see how although the vast majority of wealthy nations in the world right now use a capitalistic economic system, the American love and obsession with money is an exclusive trait relating to its modernism. Both Weber and de Tocqueville state that capitalism is almost an unavoidable system that is specifically strong within American society because of its love for money. This is a wholly modernistic view of the world in that they both believe in the natural procession of the economic world. De Tocqueville specifically perceives that democracy and capitalism can easily coexist together in that after only being a nation for 60 years, the families of the original elites have diluted within the rest of the American workforce. However, de Tocqueville's view of democracy relating to capital is in direct opposition to that of Franklin's description through Weber. De Tocqueville's experience of money was that it &quot;circulates with inconceivable rapidity, and experience shows that it is rare to find two succeeding generations in the full enjoyment of it .&quot;7 Franklin describes how the way for American economics to be a powerful tool is for people to use capital to gain more, and not to spend it rapidly. However, it is important to note that these statements only regarded people that already had a lot of money, and the actions they should take to make more. On the other hand, de Tocqueville is probably sharing the experiences of the average citizen that he came within contact, and not the powerful elite. Again, there seems to be a power difference within how the rich spend (or as the case may be, don't spend) their money and how the average citizen does. It is also important to see how de Tocqueville describes money rarely being passed down by generation. Indeed, American society would be a much more truly democratic state if every 6 7 Ibid De Tocqueville. P.21 generation got to &quot;start over&quot; on the economic ladder, and was not affected by their family's life. Perhaps this is merely a result of the relatively short timeframe that de Tocqueville was in America in that he never saw the passing of a generation, but his statement seems inherently wrong. One could surmise that de Tocqueville was again not studying the upper class and seeing the amount of wealth passed through generations. Also, his modernistic perspective made him envision a society where every person had a change at being successful because of the destruction of the &quot;hereditary partition,&quot; so he perceived the lack of wealth in an individual to be no result of his family. While both authors do not hesitate to downplay the importance that religion plays within American modernity, Weber's thesis is obviously centralized on it. Weber argues that while the absolute obsession for money is important within American society, it was the instillation of capitalism that caused it. To find the root of capitalism, Weber discusses how Calvinism specifically shaped the minds of the first Americans so that a capitalistic system would be able to be successful. The Calvinists believed in the idea of pre-destination. This idea states that God will only allow a set number of people into heaven, and furthermore, He already knows who these select individuals are. This idea then led to determinism in that the early Calvinists believed they would be able to see signs from God in their physical life as to what their destiny was in the afterlife. This created the perfect social situation in early America for capitalism to take hold of individuals because the wealthy were deemed to be in God's good graces, and should therefore be respected. Also, frivolousness with one's money was also seen is immoral, so Franklin's teachings that people could use money to simply make more had become easy to accomplish. So, according to Weber, capitalism took root in American society before it was ever a sovereign nation due to the teachings of Calvin, and the entanglement that followed has shaped American modernity inexorably. De Tocqueville describes equally the amount of power that religion has in American society. He describes that next to the idea of liberty, it is what Americans cherish most within their culture. Religion is so powerful in American society that the entire need for education is seen as actually a fight against Satan and de Tocqueville concludes that &quot;in America religion is the road to knowledge, and the observance of the divine laws leads man to civil freedom.&quot;8 This is a startling statement to make that the only way for one to become educated during the start of American society was through religion. Since education is the gateway to any type of successful career, religion would have a commanding role within the mindset of any intellectual. De Tocqueville also describes how politically open-minded the New Englanders were, but at the same time how religiously close-minded they were as well. Religion may now be added with the economic sphere as another sector that lacks liberty within early American society. It seems that de Tocqueville was so swept up with how remarkable political democracy was at the time that he failed to truly consider the implications of religious and economic narrow mindedness on that democracy. A choice can only go so far if economic or religious factors can never be questioned. Weber clearly identifies the amount of power that these two ideas hold in American society, but his modernistic perspective holds him from truly discussing the implications. If religion is powerful enough to entrap a society into a completely irrational economic system, like Weber has proposed, what other irrational situations could a society be thrust into by ideology? America has always been based on the two ideals of democracy and capitalism. However, it appears that due to the importance Americans place on money and religion, their 8 De Tocqueville. P. 14. idea of liberty has been altered into something unique. The American liberty can never question capitalism within the economic sphere, and it can never challenge the religious mindset as an acceptable form of thought. American modernity has been shaped by the fact that capitalism and religion must not be questioned. This is incredibly dangerous for society if we deem certain areas to be off limits from discussion, and is obviously undemocratic. It would be uplifting to think that the power of money and religion has diminished since the writings of de Tocqueville and Weber, but there are countless examples in today's society that depict the opposite with money and religion becoming more powerful.

Find millions of documents on Course Hero - Study Guides, Lecture Notes, Reference Materials, Practice Exams and more. Course Hero has millions of course specific materials providing students with the best way to expand their education.

Below is a small sample set of documents: