A Comparative Analysis: Cooper and Tocqueville on Political Parties

This essay delves into the contrasting perspectives of James Fenimore Cooper and Alexis de Tocqueville on the role of political parties in a democracy. Cooper criticizes political parties for fostering division, corruption, and prioritizing self-interest over the welfare of citizens, arguing they lead to biased judgments and hinder effective governance. In contrast, Tocqueville views political parties as essential for a functioning democracy, enabling public participation, networking, and the articulation of diverse viewpoints. The essay explores their arguments, examining the historical context of their views, the impact of parties on elections, and the implications for the American political system. It analyzes how each thinker perceived the impact of parties on governance and public life, offering insights into the complexities of political organization and its effect on democratic principles. The essay concludes by synthesizing their ideas, providing a balanced understanding of the enduring debate surrounding political parties and their influence on society.

1
History
Name
Lecturer
Course Title
Date

2
Why is Coer's vision of elections with no political parties better than Tocqueville's
vision needing political parties?
In the 19th century, permanent political parties were unfamiliar in the western world. The
current political system has changed and permanent political parties are being used almost in
every country for election purposes. According to cooper political parties are formed to
encourage harm and lead citizens in the wrong direction when it comes to the judgment of
character. In politics, we see and hear politicians condemning each other. However, it is hard to
tell who is right since their passions prejudices differ. Cooper views parties as an element of
error.1 However, the leaders or rather the people in those political parties pledge citizens to
support them instead of pledging them to support the policy of the state. This where the mistakes
start. The leaders have their own personal interests instead of serving the interest of the citizens
by supporting the policy of the nation.
According to cooper, the presence of parties in a nation leads to corrupt, vicious, and
unprofitable legislation with the aim of defeating the party. During campaigns, there has been a
division between states as well as division based on ethnic background. This because some
leaders in a certain political party come from a specific sate or ethnic background. This has
extended the hatred and divisions as far as to learning institutions and business organizations.
When party rules people do no rule. In real situations, parties encourage polarization. Parties are
seen as instruments of uniting people but they have failed to do so. There is a specific level of
righteousness assigned to a specific party making people who do not agree with it to be
perceived are wrong or traitors and those who agree to be perceived as right. However, it may
1 Cooper, et al., The American democrat and other political writings, n.d..

3
not be the case. Political parties may encourage ideas but in cases where those ideas agree with
their party.
Political parties have had a tendency to prioritize themselves. According to cooper, the
impact of a part is always to supersede power. For example, in a monarchy, it checks the king,
and in a democracy, it controls the people. The 2016 American presidential election cost was
estimated to be $6.4 billion. The presidential race estimating to cost $2.38billion. On the other
hand, in 2012, the total cost was estimated at $6.2 billion and $2.6 respectively. There are many
issues affecting the US. The amount of money used would have assisted in solving critical issues
affecting the US. This explains how political parties prioritize themselves so that they can be in
power.
Why is Tocqueville's vision of government with political parties better than Cooper's
vision of no political parties in elections?
According to Alexis, the unlimited freedom of association in the political parties are still
productive in America and have not yet produced fatal outcomes. In America, once a political
party dominates, all persons go through their hands. This gives a chance to its supporters to
occupy offices and absolute control of all organized forces.2 This hinders the opposite party to
access power. This means that a political party’s increase connections. It also allows persons to
network and makes friends whom they can share the political idea. Alexis perceives political as a
form of a unit which brings people who combine efforts in betterment of citizens’ rights. People
perceive association as an act of war and which brings about harmful acts.3 However, this may be
2 Alan Kahan. Aristocratic liberalism, Routledge, n.d.
3 Alexis De Tocqueville, Alexis de Tocqueville on democracy, revolution, and society, n.d.

4
the case. Alexis gives an example of an association in an army. The army needs members to
build up courage and march against the enemy. This should be the case for political parties. They
may be used in tackling problems affecting the citizens by sharing ideas.
The US takes political parties differently. As per Alexis, people who form the minority
party do so with the aim of weakening the moral authority of the majority and stimulate
competition.4 They try to come up with arguments which create an impression on the majority
since them how to attract the majority over to their side and exercise power in their name.
Although political parties are perceived to have negative effects, trey encourage public
participation by encouraging a common citizen to be politically active. This explains why Alexis
views political parties to be better.
References
Cooper, James Fenimore, Bradley J. Birzer, and John Willson. The American democrat and
other political writings. Vol. 8. Regnery Publishing, 2001.
4 Alexis De Tocqueville, Democracy in America, n.d.

5
De Tocqueville, Alexis. Alexis de Tocqueville on democracy, revolution, and society. University
of Chicago Press, 1982.
De Tocqueville, Alexis. Democracy in america. Vol. 10. Regnery Publishing, 2003.
Kahan, Alan. Aristocratic liberalism: the social and political thought of Jacob Burckhardt, John
Stuart Mill, and Alexis de Tocqueville. Routledge, 2017.