GB&F: Equality and Ambition Response

2.
Tocqueville and Jefferson both look at the equality of intelligence, but Tocqueville seems to have a different opinion on it. Tocqueville says that people should have unequal intelligence level because that they need people to blindly follow the laws and morals of the state and is a crucial component to running the country otherwise people will question the laws. I believe Tocqueville was more concerned than Jefferson because it needed to be run like that for the country to succeed were as Jefferson's was more concerned about getting rid of mob rule. These two are related becasue they both put the intelligence of the commmon people into play except Jefferson is trying to raise the intelligence, and Tocqueville is trying to keep it below the aristocracy.

5.
Jefferson has the greater faith in human nature. Tocqueville somewhat agrees with Jefferson that people in a democracy will rise up and take control. However, his opinion is that people will only feel the need to rise up in a time of crisis such as a revolution. Tocqueville seems to think that in a democracy people will lack the confidence to pursue the greatest of ambitions. He gives the example of age where people will wait until they are older to step up for a leadership position because they feel they are not experienced enough when they are younger. This somewhat contrasts with Jefferson's idea that the natural aristoi will naturally rise to take control instead of suffering through a democratic process.

Lincoln and Tocqueville give somewhat different analyses of ambition and of its operation during times of revolution and during times of peace. There are nevertheless differences in their accounts.
Tocqueville found many ambitious people in America, but few of lofty (noble) ambition. He stated that the flight of ambition is boundless during the times of revolution. He felt that all revolutions expand the ambition of humans, especially during the events of overthrowing the aristocracy. When barriers are broken and the opportunities arise, people with ambition come together universally. When the barriers are broken, the first burst of triumph seems unlimited, and the power seems satisfying to the people. To Tocqueville, ambition is always great, just as long as it is under a democratic revolution. Because of revolution and the end of aristocracy, peace always succeeds and order is restored. But, if ambition is created while conditions in the society are equal or during times of peace, it loses that quality. Among democratic nations, ambition is continual, but does not lift up to the height during times of revolution. Tocqueville stated, “What chiefly diverts a democratic people from loft ambition is not the scantiness of their fortunes, but the vehemence of the exertions they daily make to improve them. They strain their faculties to the utmost to achieve paltry results, and this cannot fail speedily to limit their discernment and to circumscribe their powers. They might be poorer and still be greater.”

On the other hand, Lincoln stated that when the people are in need of a revolution, when their government gives them no protection during times of mobocratic spirit, and no change for the better, men of sufficient talent and ambition will not seize the opportunity to help their country. Lincoln stated, “At such time and under such circumstances, men of sufficient talent and ambition will not be wanting to seize the opportunity, strike the blow, and overturn that fair fabric, which for the last half century, has been the fondest hope, of the lovers of freedom, throughout the world.” Even though the American people are attached to their government and would suffer much for its sake, this doesn’t mean that during times of mobocratic spirit and disregard towards the laws of the government, the people will fight for what is right. The reality is that the innocent suffer under this, and they soon will disregard the laws of the government and their affections towards the government will change.

1. We might encourage lofty ambition with “lofty aims.” The main problem with ambition in this age of equality is the goal of those who have it. Ambitious people these days are often seeking to gain personal wealth, power or reputation, whereas people in times of inequality often seek greatness and things that will be beneficial for generations to come. In today’s times, we must encourage ambition, but we also must encourage ambitious people to rethink their goals so that they are more driven towards greatness and less driven towards personal gain.

Jefferson was a Founding Father and as such he seems quite optimistic about the experiment that democracy in America was. I would say that Jefferson thinks that with democracy and the equality it provides a country’s citizens would reap endless benefits. Specifically we know Jefferson believed equality would extend education to everyone and that equality would give rise to a natural aristocracy. Both of these, he believed, would lead to the best country and government in history. Tocqueville doesn’t appear to see many benefits of equality. He believed that equal people, without the guidance of a true aristocracy, would turn to the majority for their beliefs, which is basically trading one master for another. He does say that equality will make everyone ambitious, but even that is not wholly beneficial to society because, he claims, that ambition will be limited and those people will care more for their own pleasure than the general good.
Tocqueville generally seems to be criticizing democracy while Jefferson defends it. I think Tocqueville’s response to Jefferson would be that he is too optimistic about democracy and the effect it will have on people and society. In the excerpt we read Tocqueville explains many negative social conditions that he sees that can emerge from an equal society while mentioning hardly any benefits. Still, in both works the authors seem democratic. Jefferson is certainly democratic in his. He obviously firmly believes that if everyone is given equal opportunity the best of the masses will rise and that there is no need to protect the wealthy or the government from the people. Tocqueville never doubts that democracy as a government system will fail or that the people are incapable. Neither does he mourn the loss of the aristocracy or monarchy. He seems to simply want to point out that with this style of governing, as with every style, there are negative effects.