Local Democracy I/V

New England's Open Meetings: An Obsolete or Pioneering Model?

NOVEMBER 7, 2024- Representative democracy is currently facing significant criticism. Elected officials are often accused of being disconnected from the concerns of their constituents, and this is just one of many grievances. In this context, participatory democracy is gaining traction. Opponents may label it as a myth or utopia, but it is still practiced, albeit in varying forms, in some Swiss cantons, certain regions of the Nordic countries, and among the Iroquois people. Following Tocqueville's footsteps, we explored New England, where WASP settlers established participatory democracy in the 17th century. What remains of this system today? Is it obsolete or pioneering? This investigation begins with Part 1/5: The Legacy of the Founding Fathers.  Part 1 of 5: Links to the other parts can be found at the bottom of the right column

In 1830, Alexis de Tocqueville, a young French aristocrat and magistrate, embarked on a transformative journey to uncover a model of a peaceful republic—an ideal political system he deeply valued. His exploration led him to Wethersfield, Connecticut, where he was captivated by the pervasive sense of equality that defined the community. This experience profoundly shaped his understanding of democracy and its potential. "Whilst the hierarchy of rank despotically classed the inhabitants of the mother country, the colony approximated more and more the novel spectacle of a community homogeneous in all parts. A democracy, more perfect than antiquity had dared to dream of, started in full size and panoply from the midst of an ancient feudal society. (…) The laws of New England in the 1620s recognized and established without discussion the intervention of the people in public affairs, the free voting of taxes, the responsibility of the agents of power, personal liberty, and trial by jury".

Last fall, I traveled to Wethersfield, New England, which was affected by a presidential campaign that sparked intense partisan political debates and fueled insults like "fascist" and "sh*t vice-president." I set out to discover what was left of this peaceful and ideal local democracy.

Before my departure, I gathered insights from various readings, especially from the investigative work of American historian Pierson, titled "Tocqueville in America." It became clear that the French author was particularly susceptible to admiration, as his perception of democracy was influenced by his experiences during the first decades of his life.

The two decades following his birth (1805) were among the most tumultuous in French history.  He was intrigued by how the immigrants in America had managed to make a success of its Revolution by avoiding the violence of the "Terror," the bloody episode of the French Revolution (1793-1794), and the establishment of the first Republic (September 1792 - May 1804), which ended with Napoleon Bonaparte being crowned Emperor.  

Quest of Peaceful Revolution

Although he did not personally experience the bloody Terror that affected his noble family, he was raised during Emperor Napoleon's imperialist regime, which ended in 1815. He was just nine years old when Louis XVIII, a constitutional king, was restored to the throne. At fifteen, he witnessed the assassination of the designated successor, Duke of Berry, and at nineteen, Charles X ascended to the throne following Louis XVIII's death. Charles X aimed to extend his powers, an ambition that sparked a new revolution known as the Revolution des Trois Glorieuses, leading to his abdication. By the time Tocqueville left France, Louis-Philippe, a constitutional king from the July Monarchy, was in power (1831). In 1848, while serving as a member of the French Parliament, Tocqueville actively participated in the establishment of the Second Republic during another violent revolution. He passed away in 1859, eight years after Napoleon III, the nephew of Napoleon Bonaparte, was crowned Emperor. Deeply committed to Republican ideals, Tocqueville disapproved of the ongoing political turmoil in France that threatened the stability of the fragile Republic.

"The French national character," as he described it, was often "unstable" and "unpredictable." In this personal and historical context, it was easy to succumb to the charms of American democracy, which remained peaceful despite the Indian Wars. Tocqueville, the first French political scientist, viewed America, a new nation, as a beacon of hope: "America is the only country in which it has been possible to witness the natural and tranquil growth of society, and where the influence of a state's origins on its future conditions can be clearly discerned.". This stability rests on three pillars described by the author: religion, education, and local governance.

Tocqueville undoubtedly fell in love, an intense emotion that often overshadowed his reason. A striking Spanish cartoon illustrates this beautifully, depicting the French lover dancing passionately, cheek to cheek, with the imposing Eagle. The gig is over. Almost two centuries have passed, and various waves of migration have profoundly transformed WASP America. As. In his book "Histoire des Américains" Daniel Boorstin wrote, "Tocqueville's America was in the process of homogenization. Immigration had been very low since the Revolution.  Suddenly, the situation changed, particularly with the Irish famine. America became a country of immigrants with several successive waves. For the White Anglo-Saxon Protestants, this invasion multiplies "the problems ."But the idea that men and races are not equal had, in fact, taken root in America as early as the seventeenth century when the colonists came into contact with the Indians and the blacks imported against their will."

Equality or illusion?

At that time, only the so-called "freemen" could participate in and vote during a town meeting. A freeman is defined as a "person of the Town who, according to the Fundamental Articles (the township's charter), has been admitted to residence by a vote of the majority of the Town." Having taken the Oath of Fidelity, Freemen were entitled to vote in the election of the Town's deputies to the General Court in Hartford. Importantly, a freeman was also a landowner.

A religious criterion was in place; the inhabitants of Wethersfield, like Oldham, were dissenters from the Established Church of the Fatherland and might initially have hesitated to welcome people with different creeds. The right to vote was denied to strangers, women, Afro-Americans, and Natives. Women were elected to school committees in the small Massachusetts towns of Ashfield and Monroe around the 1870s for the first time, but they still could not vote in other capacities. 

Seating arrangements in the meeting house were managed by a spe-
cially appointed committee, establishing a hierarchy based on criteria
such as age, wealth, dignity, and "pious disposition. Wealth was the
most significant determinant, recorded annually by the tax assessor.
Dignity and pious disposition were more subjective, leading to disputes
and arguments over seating. 

The first tool of our methodology draws inspiration from academic practices. We utilize local sources and historians who have consulted the archives of the Open Town Meetings. With the exception of the records prior to March 16, 1646-1647, which were lost, all other documents have been carefully copied and preserved alongside the originals.

According to the research conducted by Sherman W. Adams and Henry R. Stiles in "The History of Ancient Wethersfield" (1) (1904, 1974), equality was often an aspiration influenced by Christian beliefs, while the realities of daily life included bitter jealousy over seating arrangements and rhetorical abilities.

Myth or  pioneering local democracy ? Paula Cossart, Andrea Felicetti, James Kloppenberg wrote (2019): " However, nowadays the great debate on deliberative and participatory democracy has contributed to restoring the town meetings as a symbol of democratic deliberation. Town meetings remain an important apparatus of participatory democracy  in modern-day America. Gallup himself had entertained the idea of adapting town meeting democracy to larger populations: deliberative polls were viewed as an example of a democratic model "  (see part V)