Stand News 立場新聞
// …據說王岐山讀完此書後，完全折服於這個分析結果，他感覺到中國人民對貪污腐敗的不滿情緒已近沸點，而且當中最不滿的一群是擁有資產的中產階層。
讓王岐山更加折服的是托克維爾對當時法國皇室如何錯誤處理民怨並導致大革命發生的結論，就是太過軟弱！
太過軟弱有兩個層次的意思：一、對於貪污腐敗情況視而不見，二、對民間的異見聲音沒有鎮壓下去，令不滿之聲傳播開去。
說到這裡，你應該較能明白習近平和王岐山上台後大力打貪和鎮壓異見出於的是一種政權不穩甚至覆亡的恐懼，就是中共在胡溫時代已經開始掛諸於嘴邊的「亡黨、亡國」危機。//
// …據說王岐山讀完此書後，完全折服於這個分析結果，他感覺到中國人民對貪污腐敗的不滿情緒已近沸點，而且當中最不滿的一群是擁有資產的中產階層。
讓王岐山更加折服的是托克維爾對當時法國皇室如何錯誤處理民怨並導致大革命發生的結論，就是太過軟弱！
太過軟弱有兩個層次的意思：一、對於貪污腐敗情況視而不見，二、對民間的異見聲音沒有鎮壓下去，令不滿之聲傳播開去。
說到這裡，你應該較能明白習近平和王岐山上台後大力打貪和鎮壓異見出於的是一種政權不穩甚至覆亡的恐懼，就是中共在胡溫時代已經開始掛諸於嘴邊的「亡黨、亡國」危機。//
- L'Ancien Régime et la Révolution (1856) – The Old Regime and the Revolution. It is Tocqueville's second most famous work.
- L'Ancien Régime et la Révolution (1856) – The Old Regime and the Revolution. It is Tocqueville's second most famous work.
Tocqueville: The Life
Glimpsing the human side of major historical figures is endlessly fascinating. As Melville noted, Shakespeare in his own day wasn’t Shakespeare. He was Master William Shakespeare, the harried writer — mocked as an “upstart crow” by a critic — who churned out plays for the proprietors of the Globe Theater.
Skip to next paragraph
From Bettmann/Corbis
TOCQUEVILLE’S DISCOVERY OF AMERICA
By Leo Damrosch
Illustrated. 277 pp. Farrar, Straus & Giroux. $27
In “Tocqueville’s Discovery of America,” Leo Damrosch, the Ernest Bernbaum professor of literature at Harvard, reveals the man behind the sage. Damrosch shows us that “Democracy in America” was the outcome of a nine-month tour of the United States that Tocqueville, a temperamental, randy 25-year-old French apprentice magistrate of aristocratic background, took in 1831-32 with his friend Gustave de Beaumont.
The French government commissioned the pair to report on American prisons. But Tocqueville confided that he wanted to examine “all the workings of that vast American society that everyone talks about and no one knows.”
Drawing from Tocqueville’s private writings, Damrosch presents the young traveler as insatiably curious. After landing in Newport, R.I., in May 1831, Tocqueville and Beaumont visited 17 of America’s 24 states and three of its sparsely settled territories. Writing down their impressions of the many Americans they met, including notables like John Quincy Adams and Sam Houston, they accumulated a huge store of information.
Along the way, they fulfilled their original mission of exploring America’s penitentiaries. The two main kinds of prisons they analyzed — one introduced in Auburn, N. Y., the other in Philadelphia — had special rigors. In the Auburn plan, which was employed at Sing Sing penitentiary, prisoners worked together for 11 hours a day but were not allowed to speak to or look at one another. “It felt like walking through the catacombs,” Tocqueville wrote. “There were a thousand living beings there and yet it was a solitude.” Whips were always ready for the recalcitrant. The Philadelphia system offered an even harsher discipline: perpetual solitary confinement. Every prisoner inhabited a thick-walled cell and had no contact with anyone but a chaplain who visited occasionally. Tocqueville called this punishment “at once the mildest and the most terrible ever invented” — a comment substantiated by reports of the many prisoners who lost their minds or committed suicide.
The prison tour was secondary to Tocqueville’s purpose of exploring American life in all its dimensions. Every place Tocqueville went, north and south, yielded valuable insights that found their way into his book. His visits to cities made it clear to him that Americans “value everything on earth in response to this sole question: How much money will it bring in?” He found that Americans were a restless, practical people, hungry for novelty and change yet committed to working hard to get ahead. With its energetic population and abundant resources, Tocqueville wrote, America “will someday become one of the richest and most powerful countries on earth.” His excursions into the frontier and the Deep South exposed him to Indian culture, which he regarded sympathetically, and to slavery, which he accurately predicted would produce “the most horrible of all civil wars.”
While Damrosch’s book doesn’t come close to identifying real-life sources for all of Tocqueville’s arguments — no book of such concision could do that — it usefully connects specific themes to certain American locales. Cincinnati, for instance, was a particularly rich trove of information. A rapidly expanding city of 25,000, it struck Tocqueville as a place of “absolute social equality,” without social hierarchies. But it enforced what he called “very severe laws against the blacks” and thus exemplified the racism then rampant in America.
The contradictions Tocqueville found in Cincinnati fed into his larger conclusions. America, he found, was a nation of paradoxes. It proclaimed that all men were created equal, yet was suffused by racial prejudice. It placed unparalleled faith in the individual yet was conformist and controlled by the majority. It was materialistic yet deeply religious, commercial but puritanical. It had a carefully conceived Constitution and a well-defined political system, yet its most important decisions sprang from public opinion and mores, not the government.
Damrosch is an acute observer of Tocqueville, whose generalizations, he notes, don’t always stand up to scrutiny. Although Tocqueville was right about the importance of America’s middle class, he minimized widening divisions between the rich and the poor. Tocqueville took an overly harsh view of Andrew Jackson, dismissing him as “a man of violent temperament and mediocre abilities,” ignoring his charisma and his political abilities. An agnostic raised as a Catholic, Tocqueville exaggerated the oddness of evangelical religion, misreading its social meaning for Americans.
Still, as Damrosch suggests, Tocqueville’s responses to America were more perceptive and appreciative than those of other European travelers, like Frances Trollope and Charles Dickens. These visitors made pungent, informational comments about America but showed a provincialism that Tocqueville rose above. The fastidious Trollope portrayed America as a nation of boorish tobacco-chewers, bellowing revivalists and swaggerers. Dickens complained about the grunting pigs and screaming newsboys on the streets of Manhattan. For Tocqueville, such excesses were part of the liveliness and brashness of an ever-changing democratic society.
Returning to France in March 1832 full of enthusiasm for the American system, Tocqueville set himself to writing his two large volumes. He told a friend, “I’ve hurled myself at America in a sort of fury. . . . I think about hardly anything else.” The books made him famous, and he rose in the French government, which he hoped to help redesign. He said in a speech that he had seen in America that democracy could be “living, active and triumphant,” and he urged his nation to follow America’s example. For a brief period after the democratic revolutions of 1848, it seemed that France would heed his advice. But when Louis-Napoleon dissolved the National Assembly and announced himself Emperor Napoleon III in 1852, Tocqueville’s democratic dreams were dashed and his political career was over.
He was beset by personal problems. His wife grew frantic over his affairs. Having told her that he had “vast desires” and “passions that lead me astray,” he was, in Damrosch’s words, “regularly (not to say compulsively) unfaithful.” Subject to mood swings, he became increasingly depressed about his nation, which he compared to a man traveling on a moonless, foggy December night. He bitterly recalled the youthful ardor that had driven the writing of “Democracy in America,” which he no longer even looked at except to make corrections for reprints. When he died of tuberculosis at 53 in 1859, he could not know that his penetrating observations on America would stand as timeless statements about democratic society.
沒有留言:
張貼留言