/lit/ - Literature

There's no way you could fit four pages' worth of argumentative rigor into one sentence. This is a really dumb thread.

>>21472723
>There's no way you could fit four pages' worth of argumentative rigor into one sentence.
For you.

Also don't comment if you don't know who Tocqueville is and have never read him.

>>21472723
Also, he doesn’t spread an argument over several pages, he repeats the same point several times and pads out the rest with filler.

Does he literally count out four or so pages each time he wants to make a point? No.
Does he routinely pad out his writing until it unnecessarily consumes an excessive amount of the reader’s time, to the point where a joke can be made about it? Yes.
Will knuckle-dragging r*tards like you not be able to discern the difference? Apparently.

Again, don’t comment on my thread when you’ve read nothing about the subject, you fucking idiot.

>anti-tocquevillefag is still here still seething
Post the best tocquevillefag threads.

Democracy's a fun read

>>21473585
Nothing fun about democracy.

tocqueville's prose is crisp, thick, solid, tight. what appears like long periods is the necessary great size of his analytic rhetoric.

>>21474784
Why not?

my lover

>>21472721
Hello my fellow Americans

>>21472721
Considering how obtuse people are, I'm halfway there. You can't say "please pass the salt" without proving salt exists from first principles with some people.

>>21476163
I am simply defending royalism in my country, I don't know for them

I am 19 years old, I like poetry, literature, in particular Chateaubriand since my 15, I consider myself as a royalist. It is to be a believer, to want a king for our country. This is opposed to democracy, so I would like to put a quote from Toqueville on democracy because we have to talk about its opposite and the politics in which we live to understand:
“Do you want to give the human spirit a certain height, a generous way of looking at the things of this world? Do you want to inspire men with a kind of contempt for material goods? »

“Do you want to give birth to or maintain deep convictions and prepare great devotions? Is it for you to polish morals, to elevate manners, to make the arts shine? Do you want poetry, noise, glory? Do you claim to organize a people in such a way as to have a strong influence on all the others? Do you intend him to tempt great enterprises, and, whatever the result of his efforts, to leave an immense trace in history? If this is, according to you, the main object that men in society should have in view, do not take the government of democracy; it would surely not lead you to the goal. »

I did not put fully but it comes from his book Democracy in America which personally gave me a lot of arguments in favor of royalism.

>>21476216
"But if it seems useful to you to divert the intellectual and moral activity of man towards the necessities of material life, and to employ it to produce well-being; if reason seems to you more profitable to men than genius; if your object is not to create heroic virtues, but peaceful habits; if you like to see vices rather than crimes, and prefer to find fewer great actions, on condition of encountering fewer crimes; if, instead of acting in the bosom of a brilliant society, it suffices for you to live in the midst of a prosperous society; if, finally, the principal object of a government is not, according to you, to give to the whole body of the nation the most strength or the most glory possible, but to procure for each of the individuals who compose it the more well-being and save him the most misery; then equalize the conditions and constitute the government of democracy."

"What will the new society be? I do not know. Its laws are unknown to me. [...] Probably the human species will increase, but it is to be feared that man will diminish, that some eminent faculties of genius will be lost, that the imagination, poetry, the arts, will die in the holes of a hive-society where each individual will be no more than a bee, a wheel in a machine, an atom in organized matter."

- François-René de Chateaubriand, Memories from beyond the grave

Is the everyman's revised and edited translation good?

>>21472733
fuck him

>>21476276
That is such an absolutely retarded argument, jesus christ. So you believe that monarchy allows the best and brightest of society to be preserved and supported at the top, so that they can produce these "great works", and the idea of creating a better life for more of the population is a waste of time. You absolute mongoloid, humanity has not stopped creating great works since the death of monarchism, and by increasing the quality of life for all social and economic classes, you increase the pool of talent that can create great art. Plenty of era-defining artists have come from ordinary backgrounds, and in your "perfect" world, they'd be too busy being relegated to serfdom to create anything.

Also, there are still monarchies in the world, and they are shit, because it turns out, when you give all the power and authority in a country to one family and have no way of holding them accountable for their actions, they might not have any inclination to be humane towards their citizens, or even bother with art. Charles the II of spain was an inbred monster who only cared about shooting guns drooling out of his malformed mouth.

Great artists still get support and still make impressive works, except now, they don't have to rely on a select number of patrician families to support their work, they can still appeal to the ultra-wealthy, but also the general population, who now have surplus wages to support art they enjoy.

I understand the basic argument for monarchism, that by educating potential leaders in matters of state, and giving them an office which they hold for life, that we grant ourselves longlasting stability at the hands of a competent leader, but that is not remotely close to reality, even a king as great as Louis XIV had all of his progress ruined in about 2 more kings. Democracy is not perfect, but at least we have the capacity to replace our leaders with something short of an execution.

Listen, I know you're 19 and you're not even close to being done developing as a person, but i want you to genuinely ask yourself, are you stupid enough to think monarchism is a good idea?

>>21476833
NTA. I'm not even a monarchist but you are arguing from emotion.
>you increase the pool of talent that can create great art.
How's that working out for you? Well, you increase the pool that can create "art", anyway.
>Also, there are still monarchies in the world, and they are shit
They're only still around because they weren't worth democratizing, I'm not saying "real monarchism has never been tried" but you can't argue that modern monarchies are a fair comparison.
>when you give all the power and authority in a country to one family and have no way of holding them accountable for their actions, they might not have any inclination to be humane towards their citizens, or even bother with art.
Because today's leaders are known for being super accountable, right?

>>21476833
>Democracy is not perfect, but at least we have the capacity to replace our leaders with something short of an execution.

>>21476833
huh?

>>21472721
There's no way you could fit four pages' worth of argumentative rigor into one sentence. This is a really dumb thread.

>>21476833
I don't care if it is not a good regim in an other country, I'm just saying it would be better for mine. Do you know at least the regims in Europe, let's laugh. Spain is a monarchy and it's one of the of the freest country in the world, their king Felipe VI is a Bourbon, French royal family, direct descendant of Louis XIV precisely.

>>21477388

>>21477394
It's twelve states that they are a monarchy

>>21477403
13*

>>21477405

More than that, 15 in fact, I forget Turkey I don't know why this country it is in union by the way and Bielorussia

>>21477411
Belarus, it's Biélorussie in french sorry.

>>21476833
>Charles the II of spain was an inbred monster who only cared about shooting guns drooling out of his malformed mouth.
You shut your fucking mouth you worthless waste of air. I don't care if this post is fucking bait, you're a disgrace. Fuck off

>>21477388
Felipe IV is a spineless puppet, and his father a kin slayet and a whoremonger.
Franco may had not been perfect, but he was leagues ahead of the Borbones, not even mention any of the two republics
And his legacy has been squandered by the democracy, with full complicity of the monarchy
If anything, Spain is a pefect exemple of Tocqueville reservations about monarchy and democracy
t. Un disfrutasiestas

>>21476709
Dunno but interested