Joshua Miller

Fashion and Democratic Relationships

Clothing has political significance because it affects the relationships among citizens. Clothing is not simply a private or personal matter; it implies the existence of an intersubjective social world in which one presents oneself and is seen by others. In examining the implications of fashion for political relationships, I will concede that fashion aggravates antagonistic relationships among citizens when it is used to flaunt ones status and wealth, but I will also argue that clothes can also be used to exhibit respect toward others and allegiance to a group. Clothes, therefore, sometimes facilitate the democratic ideal of widely distributed power. Fashion can provoke dialogue about social and political matters, and that dialogue is democratic. When fashion manifests creativity, respect, allegiance, or membership, the relationships that it fosters are potentially democratic.

A Tocqueville for Our Time

I am glad that political theorists are returning to Tocqueville. Reading Tocqueville changed my life. Thirty years ago, at the University of California, Santa Cruz, John Schaar assigned Tocqueville’s Democracy in America in his American Political Thought course, and I quickly adopted Tocqueville’s ideals, as interpreted by Schaar, of local democracy, participation in public life, and political community. Schaar sought to decentralize power in the United States and invoked Tocqueville as an ally. Tocqueville’s claim that an American would “lose half his existence” if he could not participate in politics seemed to be an appropriate standard by which to judge the degradation of our political system. If Tocqueville thought that aristocracy could not be recaptured, Schaar believed that Tocqueville’s vision of American democracy could be. So after college I became a community organizer, and we tried to put into practice Tocqueville’s notion of “self-interest rightly understood.” If you could get people to take action about a small local concern, such as the lack of a stop sign at a dangerous intersection, they would be transformed by their victory and experience of politics and would start caring about broader issues. Eventually, I came to realize that Tocqueville was not perfect. It was unclear that he wanted citizens to participate in politics beyond the local level. Also, his critique of majority tyranny could be read as antidemocratic and anticommunitarian, contrary to what is most appealing in his vision of liberty. And he believed that, when they marry, women should give up their independence and position in public life. The Tocqueville depicted in the books under review, both of which offer nuanced criticisms and appreciations of his work, does not offer a guide to political action. Cheryl Welch explicates Tocqueville’s texts, including The Old Regime and the French Revolution, attends to his intentions and histori-