《论美国的民主·卷二·二部·第四章·美国人以自由制度对抗个人主义》第2节
I may here be met by an objection derived from electioneering intrigues, the meannesses of candidates, and the calumnies of their opponents. These are opportunities for animosity which occur the oftener the more frequent elections become. Such evils are doubtless great, but they are transient; whereas the benefits which attend them remain. The desire of being elected may lead some men for a time to violent hostility; but this same desire leads all men in the long run mutually to support each other; and if it happens that an election accidentally severs two friends, the electoral system brings a multitude of citizens permanently together, who would always have remained unknown to each other. Freedom engenders private animosities, but despotism gives birth to general indifference. The Americans have combated by free institutions the tendency of equality to keep men asunder, and they have subdued it. The legislators of America did not suppose that a general representation of the whole nation would suffice to ward off a disorder at once so natural to the frame of democratic society, and so fatal: they also thought that it would be well to infuse political life into each portion of the territory, in order to multiply to an infinite extent opportunities of acting in concert for all the members of the community, and to make them constantly feel their mutual dependence on each other. The plan was a wise one. The general affairs of a country only engage the attention of leading politicians, who assemble from time to time in the same places; and as they often lose sight of each other afterwards, no lasting ties are established between them. But if the object be to have the local affairs of a district conducted by the men who reside there, the same persons are always in contact, and they are, in a manner, forced to be acquainted, and to adapt themselves to one another.
注释摘要
托克维尔在这一段里主动迎向一种可能招致反驳的情形，然后把它翻转成自己的论据。反对者的声音大致是说，频繁的选举会催生阴谋、拉票时的低级手段、候选人之间的相互诽谤，这些事在民主制度下屡见不鲜，选举越频繁，敌意和冲突的机会就越多。他并不否认这类现象的存在，甚至承认“这些恶确实是大的”，但紧接着就用一个时间维度上的对比把问题的重心移开了：它们是暂时的，而选举带来的…