58 pages

English

Vous pourrez modifier la taille du texte de cet ouvrage

Découvre YouScribe en t'inscrivant gratuitement

Je m'inscris

Memoirs on Pauperism and Other Writings , livre ebook

University of Notre Dame Press - Alexis De Tocqueville

Découvre YouScribe en t'inscrivant gratuitement

Je m'inscris

Obtenez un accès à la bibliothèque pour le consulter en ligne
En savoir plus

58 pages

English

Vous pourrez modifier la taille du texte de cet ouvrage

Obtenez un accès à la bibliothèque pour le consulter en ligne
En savoir plus

A propos
Informations
Extrait

Description

The collection includes new translations of Tocqueville's works, including the first English translation of his Second Memoir, the original Memoir, a letter fragment considering pauperism in Normandy, and the ‘‘Pauperism in America’’ index to the Penitentiary Report.

Alexis de Tocqueville was one of the most important thinkers of the nineteenth century, and his thought continues to influence contemporary political and social discourse. In Memoirs on Pauperism and Other Writings, Christine Dunn Henderson brings all of Tocqueville’s writings on poverty together for the first time: a new translation of his original Memoir and the first English translation of his unfinished Second Memoir, as well as his letter considering pauperism in Normandy and the ‘‘Pauperism in America’’ appendix to his Penitentiary Report. By uniting these texts in a single volume, Henderson makes possible a deeper exploration of Tocqueville’s thought as it pertains to questions of inequality and public assistance. As Henderson shows in her introduction to this collection, Tocqueville provides no easy blueprint for fixing these problems, which remain pressing today. Still, Tocqueville’s writings speak eloquently about these issues, and his own unsuccessful struggle to find solutions remains both a spur to creative thinking today and a caution against attempting to find simplistic remedies.

Memoirs on Pauperism and Other Writings allows us to study his sustained thought on pauperism, poverty assistance, governmental assistance programs, and social inequality in a new and deeper way. The insights in these works are important not only for what they tell us about Tocqueville but also for how they help us to think about contemporary social challenges. This collection will be essential not only to students and scholars of Tocqueville’s thought, nineteenth-century France, and political economy, but also to all those interested in the issues of public assistance, associative life, voluntary associations, and charities.

Thus, the “fourth paradox” is really more of a question—and a fairly simple one at that: Is the slide into soft despotism inevitable? In the Toquevillian analysis, democracy can generate feelings of weakness and isolation, which would cause individuals to turn to government, rather than each other, to solve social problems such as poverty. Doing this creates even more feelings of weakness, isolation, and impotence, until the very idea of associating to solve their own problems is impossible. Yet the solution Tocqueville offers to the problems of democratic isolation and impotence is precisely what democracy makes so problematic: turning to each other. In one sense, this is very Tocquevillian and very in keeping with Tocquevillian arguments such as the best remedy to the dangers of liberty is more liberty. But in another, it is more complicated, for once a people has begun to turn to government to solve its problems—as had happened in England well before Tocqueville penned the Memoir—it is not clear that this slide into soft despotism can be reversed. But perhaps it can be slowed, and certainly, encouraging voluntary associations and other nongovernmental solutions to social problems would slow that slide.

In the Second Memoir Tocqueville wonders briefly whether industrial workers’ associations might obviate the need for excessive concentrations of capital, but he dismisses this solution as not yet ripe. Desiring voluntary and local solutions, Tocqueville concedes that some form of governmental assistance to the poor seems necessary in the modern world and possibly—in the cases of free schools for children of the poor, for example—even desirable. Private initiative might be stronger and more effective than public initiative theoretically, but once poverty relief begins to be a governmental task (as Tocqueville believes it inevitably will), can it ever be returned to private hands? Skeptics from a modern public choice perspective, echoing Tocqueville’s observation of the tensions here, would remind us that agencies have their own interests, and once empowered, agencies would be reluctant to return their powers to private associations or even to diminish the sphere of their own jurisdiction. In the Memoir, Tocqueville acknowledges something of this issue in his criticisms of bureaucrats and in his discussions about the coordination problems associated with public relief efforts. But the deeper Tocquevillian concerns about whether the movement to governmental solutions can be reversed, I think, are the psychological ones about whether a people that has begun voluntarily to cede its liberty—and has begun the slide into soft despotism—can ever reclaim it.

Tocqueville does not directly address the question of whether soft despotism can be reversed by reinvigorating citizens’ desires to take care of themselves and to find private solutions to social problems. Indeed, Democracy in America’s rather bleak ending, in which Tocqueville warns of the dangers soft despotism poses to liberty, suggests that a reversal might not be possible and that once people begin to turn to public agents to find solutions to problems such as poverty, their abilities to find their own solutions will be gravely and irrevocably weakened. Yet two moments in Democracy in America suggest that reversing the descent into soft despotism might be possible. The first comes in the discussion of how free institutions and local political participation combat what Tocqueville sees as the harmful effects of individualism. Tocqueville believes the exercise of political rights constantly reminds the individual of his connections to his fellow citizens and of the fact that “the duty as well as the interest of men is to make themselves useful to their fellows.” Political participation might originally be motivated by interest or feelings of duty, but over time, the activity of promoting the general interest becomes habitual and eventually a consciously sought end, both within a political context and beyond that context. Describing this process, Tocqueville writes, “You first get involved in the general interest by necessity, and then by choice; what was calculation becomes instinct; and by working for the good of your fellow citizens, you finally acquire the habit and taste of serving them.”

The second moment comes just pages later, in Tocqueville’s discussion of the importance of civil associations.There, he warns of the dangers of “social power”—later explicitly identified as government—sapping individuals’ ability to solve their problems without its assistance. He writes, “The more it puts itself in the place of associations, the more individuals, losing the idea of association, will need it to come to their aid.” Again, only the practice of associative life can halt this process, and in the discussion that follows, Tocqueville makes clear that the practice of associative life can also reverse the process, restoring independence and initiative where they have been lost. He states, “Sentiments and ideas are renewed, the heart grows larger, and the human mind develops only by the reciprocal action of men on each other” (emphasis added). Thus, perhaps it is possible to turn the tide, and to renew citizens’ desire and ability to find private solutions to their problems. But Tocqueville is explicit that government cannot legislate this process of re-invigorating citizen initiative. He writes, “It does not depend on the laws to revive beliefs that are fading.” Government cannot legislate this civic renewal, but it can and should act indirectly, by awakening our natural instincts to help each other. In the context of poverty relief, government can encourage and strengthen what Tocqueville considers a natural sentiment to provide assistance to the needy, but it can do this only by stepping back and allowing individuals to fill the vacuum and to find their own responses to this problem.

In the Second Memoir, Tocqueville had begun to think about how economic empowerment through land ownership and personal savings might help protect people from the exposure to chance in a world dominated by manufacturing economies and the production of luxury goods. Against the problems set out in Democracy in America, we can consider how economic responsibility might also assist in the development of the capacity of social action by individuals and voluntary associations. Today, we should not read Tocqueville’s Memoirs on Pauperism as failures in their inability to offer blueprints for a solution; rather, we can approach them as invitations to us to re-engage in thinking about these issues and how to find creative, new solutions to what Tocqueville observed was a characteristic tension between liberty and equality in the modern world.

Introduction

1. Memoir on Pauperism (1835)

2. Second Memoir on Pauperism (1837)

3. Letter on Pauperism in Normandy (undated)

4. Pauperism in America (1833)

Sujets

Philosophie

Philosophie politique

Social Policy

Public Policy

19th Century

Political

Modern

HISTORY

POLITICAL SCIENCE

PHILOSOPHY

Philosophie et théologie

Inglaterra

Poor Law Amendment Act 1834

Modern history

Democracy in America

Politics

Wales

England

Obermodern-Zutzendorf

Informations

Publié par	University of Notre Dame Press
Date de parution	01 février 2021
Nombre de lectures	0
EAN13	9780268109066
Langue	English

Informations légales : prix de location à la page 0,3750€. Cette information est donnée uniquement à titre indicatif conformément à la législation en vigueur.

Extrait

Memoirs on Pauperism and Other Writings
MEMOIRS ON
PAUPERISM
— AND OTHER WRITINGS —
Poverty, Public Welfare, and Inequality
ALEXIS DE TOCQUEVILLE
Edited and translated by
CHRISTINE DUNN HENDERSON
University of Notre Dame Press
Notre Dame, Indiana
University of Notre Dame Press
Notre Dame, Indiana 46556
undpress.nd.edu
Copyright © 2021 by University of Notre Dame
All Rights Reserved
Published in the United States of America
Library of Congress Control Number: 2020950374
ISBN: 978-0-268-10904-2 (Hardback)
ISBN: 978-0-268-10905-9 (Paperback)
ISBN: 978-0-268-10907-3 (WebPDF)
ISBN: 978-0-268-10906-6 (Epub)
This e-Book was converted from the original source file by a third-party vendor. Readers who notice any formatting, textual, or readability issues are encouraged to contact the publisher at undpress@nd.edu
CONTENTS
Acknowledgments
A Note on the Texts
Introduction
Memoir on Pauperism (1835)
Second Memoir on Pauperism (1837)
Letter on Pauperism in Normandy
Pauperism in America (1833)
Notes
Index
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Many people contributed—either directly or indirectly—to the creation of this volume, and I am indebted to them all. Lenore Thomas Ealy first suggested that “someone” should translate the Second Memoir on Pauperism , and both the introduction and the Second Memoir benefited from her deft editing and keen ear for language. Other early encouragement for working on the memoirs came from the late John Blundell and from Steve Wrinn at University of Notre Dame Press. I am also grateful for the feedback from the several groups with whom I have shared discussions of the memoirs over the years: attendees at a 2013 dinner colloquy entitled “The End of Social Justice” sponsored by The Philanthropic Enterprise; students and faculty at Furman University in 2014, and a group brought together by the Bastiat Society in Indianapolis that same year; my former colleagues at Liberty Fund; and the participants in a 2019 colloquium sponsored by the Mercatus Center (with the support of the John Templeton Foundation).
Hank Clark, Enrico Colombatto, and Catherine Labio read drafts of the various translations and offered many suggestions for improvement. I am indebted to them for generously sharing their time and expertise and for saving me from countless blunders. I am similarly indebted to the anonymous readers at University of Notre Dame Press for their close readings of this book and for their many helpful suggestions about the introduction and the translation itself. Despite the heroic efforts of all of these people, I am sure some translation errors remain; responsibility for these lies entirely with me. Finally, Chandran Kukathas read every word of this book, offering support, insightful comments, and bad puns along the way. James Henderson provided equally strong moral support and slightly better puns. Both of these proto-Tocquevillians have enriched my life beyond words; I dedicate this volume to them.
A NOTE ON THE TEXTS
These translations are based on the French editions of Tocqueville’s texts as found in the multivolume Oeuvres Complètes ( OC ) published by Gallimard, under the direction of François Mélonio. Both Mémoires and the Lettre sur le paupérisme en Normandie are found in Mélanges ( OC , vol. 16), while “Paupérisme en Amérique” is an appendix to Du système pénitentiaire aux États-Unis, et de son application en France and is found in the OC , volume 4. As noted, all references to Democracy in America are from the historical-critical edition of Democracy in America , edited by Eduardo Nolla, translated by James T. Schleifer, and published by Liberty Fund (2010).
Notes that are original to Tocqueville are indicated with superscript letters and appear at the bottom of the page; editorial notes are indicated with superscript numerals and appear at the back of the book. Unless otherwise noted, all italics in the text reflect italics in the French sources.
INTRODUCTION
Christine Dunn Henderson
Alexis de Tocqueville (1805–59) is best remembered in the United States for Democracy in America , his penetrating study of life in the early nineteenth century. Tocqueville was, of course, an analyst of his own France, and his The Old Regime and the Revolution remains a classic analysis of prerevolutionary and revolutionary France. Less well known, however, is that Tocqueville was also keenly interested in England, traveling there several times and following with great attention the political and social developments there during his lifetime. One outgrowth of his interest in England’s politics was his Memoir on Pauperism , a brief but powerful piece written following an 1833 visit to England and delivered to the Royal Academic Society of Cherbourg in 1835. This memoir, which was not included in the early editions of Tocqueville’s collected works and which was not even translated into English until 1968, captures England at a very specific moment, as her Elizabethan-era poor laws were undergoing major revision, via the Poor Law Amendment Act of 1834. 1
In the Memoir , Tocqueville explores the unanticipated evils arising from public assistance programs; via this investigation, we can glimpse some of Tocqueville’s influences, as well as the distinctiveness of his analysis of democracy—an analysis that remains constant across his thought and that connects the Memoir to his other works. In terms of influences, his exploration of how public charity causes the ranks of paupers to swell is shaped by the work of J.-B. Say, and the account of man’s movement from the state of nature to civil society is clearly indebted to Rousseau. In terms of continuities with Tocqueville’s other works, the Memoir ’s discussions of the links between poverty and crime recall similar themes explored in “Pauperism in America,” an appendix to the 1833 Penitentiary Report (coauthored with Gustave de Beaumont), which had provided the original “excuse” (as Tocqueville described it) for the trip to the United States that eventually spurred the writing of Democracy in America . Echoes of some of Democracy in America ’s central elements can also be found in the Memoir , particularly in the importance ascribed to voluntary associations in a free society, in Tocqueville’s preference for local action, and even in the elements of democratic psychology at play in the statement of the problem as well as in potential solutions.
The Memoir ends with the promise of a sequel, in which Tocqueville would outline solutions to the discrepancies between the intentions and outcomes of policy he observed in England. Although he partially drafted a Second Memoir on Pauperism , that work remained unfinished, the problem of crafting an improved remedy unsolved. This volume brings the two memoirs together for the first time in English, along with a letter fragment considering pauperism in Normandy, and the “Pauperism in America” appendix to the Penitentiary Report. When read in combination, the Memoir , its unfinished sequel, and the other pieces invite exploration of several themes, including the challenge of poverty in modern society, the possibilities and difficulties associated with various attempts to find solutions, and the manner in which democratic society—the inevitable future in Tocqueville’s view, as well as the “operative idea” behind his thinking—affects both the issue of poverty and various solutions to it. This introduction focuses primarily on the two memoirs, exploring the problems of modern poverty as well as the various solutions Tocqueville ponders, particularly considering them in the context of the themes developed more fully in Democracy in America .
SOME BACKGROUND
Before we turn to the memoirs themselves, a brief overview of the status of poor relief in England and Wales is necessary. Until the mid-sixteenth century, aid to the poor had generally been administered by the church, on a parish-based level. When Henry VIII began expropriating England’s monasteries in 1536, however, two effects were soon felt that caused assistance to the poor to move out of the hands of the church and into the hands of the state: on the one hand, the church had fewer resources to allocate to its poor-relief efforts, and on the other hand, the state’s coffers expanded. The state thus began to fill the vacuum left by the expropriated monasteries and to provide relief and assistance to the poor. This activity was codified in a series of laws enacted during the reign of Elizabeth I, the best known of which was the Poor Law Relief Act of 1601, also known as the Elizabethan Poor Law. 2 In essence, the Poor Law created a national system of relief for the poor, who were divided into “able-bodied” poor, who were capable of working, and the “impotent” poor, who were not. Shelter was provided to both groups, and the impotent poor—usually the aged or infirm—were given additional relief in the form of money, food, or clothing. As a condition of assistance, the able-bodied poor were required to work either outdoors or in workhouses. Relief was financed through local land taxes and administered by local parishes, whose overseers could at least theoretically claim to possess knowledge of each recipient’s circumstances and character. 3
This system remained in place for almost two hundred years, with the only major reform being the 1795 establishment of the Speenhamland System, which provided bread subsidies to “every poor and industrious man” whose wages fell below a certain level, as well as bread subsidies based on the number of children in a family. While well intentioned, the Speenhamland System had unanticipated and undesirable consequences, for the bread subsidy kept wages artificially low—sometimes to the point that working seemed less advantageous than collecting benefits—while the increased subsidy for additional children was widely viewed as encouraging poor families to have children they could not afford, thus swelling the ranks of eventu