Author: Charlie Shadek

The life of a slave and a Native American are different in how they live and the languages, and their basic ways of life, but they share the common trend of being inferior to the white race. Something that both races had not experienced ever before. The power in which the white race holds is mind-blowing. They were able to travel to a foreign country and establish their dominance against an already established race who had been there for centuries, and on top of that bring in a race under their own control.

Tocqueville made clear observations of the mixed races that begun in America between the African Americans and settled Europeans. Many different races occurred and America became a melting pot. Tocqueville talks about children of slaves being born into slavery and how the fate of their life is predetermined. It is the understanding that your life has already been chosen for you and being born into slavery in my eyes is living dead. There is no substance and purpose. 

The adaption of democracy in the colonies was shocking to Tocqueville as no aristocracy characteristics occurred. Equality could be found. People could come together and put their differences aside and have a functional state. Getting equality from inheritance was capable and land from your father would be equally distributed between you and your siblings or relatives. Why could equality be found in the colonies but not in the European powerhouse countries like France, Tocqueville’s mother country? Law was the backbone of the equality of in the colonies; keeping it in order. Would you rather prefer no class or class? I find it really fascinating to see how in early years of America no class existed and it was able to function. 

According to Tocqueville, man will forever keep improving to reach perfectibility and I can agree with that because one is not born perfect, and they must learn and correct themselves to be better. The difference Tocqueville explores is that in aristocracy man can be improved but not indefinitely but in democracy man can be improved indefinitely. He says that aristocracy people believe there is a certain limit to which humankind can improve to; one that isn’t reached yet but there is a maximum of improvement. I think there is no limit to improvement, but it is not possible to reach ultimate perfection. In my eyes, humanity will forever improve to be better but will not reach perfection as flaws will always be present. Humans should seek to improve and reach perfection as it will make society stronger and better.

In society where people are classed by rank, profession, or by birth, people are less likely to seek past their pre-conceived destiny. It is a matter of hope and belief that you can push past the notion of their pre-determined lives based on their rank, profession, or by birth. It is not set in stone the future of people’s lives; there may be an opinionated fate but it is up to the person to determine how their life will be and if it will improve. I believe that one must improve and push past their pre-determined life in hopes of reaching perfection yet not ever achieving perfection.