Tocqueville Fellows Blog, by Maddie Moore: “Tocqueville’s Materialism and the Idea of Equality: How the Heart Shapes the Soul”
By Maddie Moore
Maddie Moore is a student at Furman University majoring in Politics & International Affairs and History, with a minor in Ancient Greek and Roman Studies. Hailing from Whitesboro, Texas, she is a member of the Class of 2027 in the society of Tocqueville Fellows, an intellectual community dedicated to exploring the philosophic and moral foundations of democratic life.
Editor’s Note:
This reflection was written in response to Dr. Mark Lilla’s lecture at the Tocqueville Center for the Study of Democracy and Society at Furman University. The talk, titled “Tocqueville and the Problem of Materialism,” explored the tension between equality, material comfort, and democratic culture in America today. Dr. Lilla delivered the lecture on [insert date] as part of the Tocqueville Center’s ongoing public series on religion and democracy.
Mark Lilla discussing Tocqueville and materialism in the Tocqueville Center’s September, ’25, event
How Consumer Culture Shapes Democratic Thinking
When purchasing something, a shopper often does not realize how much they are influenced by the surrounding culture—or how that influence shapes the way they think about others within a democratic society. This pattern emerges because citizens often look to political and cultural leaders and begin to desire the same things those leaders value. Over time, that imitation can damage the democracy in various ways, including weakening the virtue and moral posture of the people. In his book Democracy in America, Alexis de Tocqueville wrote about materialism, where he identified that materialistic well-being in a democratic state will contribute to the restlessness of the soul. This restlessness of the soul contributes to a desire for more material things, which affects the virtue of a group of people. I would like to argue that the idea of buying these materialistic goods, and the shaping of democratic culture, does have an impact on the idea of virtue in society.
Material and Equal Conditions in a Democratic Culture
To start, Tocqueville identifies two main conditions in which materialism impacts culture: material conditions and equal conditions. Material conditions mean that a group of people has economic and geographical similarities with each other. Equal conditions refer to similarities in religion and ethnicity. The greater both conditions are, the greater the chance of influence both have on society. In this logic, those who have the most monetary power and who have the strongest morals will shape the way society moves in relation to people thinking that they are all equal. Most people of this time would have understood to a degree that what they spend their time on is where their focus would be. So, the more they spent on God, the more they would be a God-focused people; and the more they spent on material things, the more their focus would shift in that direction. Under these conditions, the idea of moderation can be fostered so that people can understand when to be content. These conditions also allow for the idea that people should continue the path they are on with an air of caution so that they may help democracy to expand and allow others to experience it for themselves.
A Colonial Example: Tea, Virtue, and the Birth of a Revolution
I have come across an example of this in my current American Revolution class that is like this idea of virtue in relation to society. The example is as follows: the colonists, who already thought of themselves as British citizens, wanted to be more like the British people. So, when the upper class of England started drinking tea, the colonists proceeded to mimic them. In this way, the colonists felt closer and more related to the people in Great Britain. Most everyone in Great Britain and the colonies was drinking tea, even though it was considered a woman’s drink because it did not have the same appeal beer did. The colonists thought that because of this, along with other governmental ideas—like all Englishmen having the same rights—they were considered Englishmen and were equal to those in Great Britain. As it turns out, while more and more people began to drink tea, the colonists started to see tea as an extravagant luxury that promoted vanity, laziness, or other vices instead of virtues. These vices, along with the fact that the British in Parliament at the time of the American Revolution did not see the colonists as Englishmen, eventually led to the American Revolution.
How Materialism Undermines Equality and Moderation
So, in theory, if you have the same object and are equal to those of a higher status, then you have the right to participate in the democratic government. If those in charge give more power to objects that only they can have, then the idea of equality becomes unbalanced. In this case, the virtue of moderation is also lost. Tocqueville wrote that “Democracy favors the taste for material enjoyments. This taste, if it becomes excessive, soon disposes men to believe that everything is only matter; and materialism, in turn, finally carries them with an insane fervor toward these same enjoyments.” All ideas of moderation and of a higher being who sees everyone as equal leave the picture when the freedom and ability to purchase more become the god that people search for. The search for comfort becomes the standard in a democratic culture, and even the slightest enjoyment will slowly move concerns away from politics and toward more materialism.
Education, Division, and Tocqueville’s Modern Relevance
In his speech, Dr. Lilla concluded by saying that there was nothing that could unite people and make them all equal except education. He also mentioned that even in college sports—the one thing people could agree on—people can become divided because of preferences they may have toward a certain school. People also spend so much on college merchandise and supporting their favorite teams that they end up forgetting about other things. This leads to more arguing, and even if sports could bring people together, they will also divide them. In Dr. Lilla’s argument, however, he removes the idea of religion, the idea of ethnicity (in a racial or political sense), and the idea of the virtue that comes out of moderation, as Tocqueville wrote. This ends on a note that is not hopeful for the common reader. And while I cannot supply any tips on how to be better at materialism and be a better participant in democratic society, I can say that Tocqueville would be interested in modern American democracy, as it is different from what it was like when he visited and would like to study it.
Sources:
Tocqueville, Alexis de, Eduardo Nolla, and James T. Schleifer. Democracy in America. Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Fund, 2012.