Our contemporaries are constantly excited by two conflicting passions:  they want to be led, and they wish to remain free.  As they cannot destroy either the one or the other of these contrary propensities, they strive to satisfy them both at once.  They devise a sole, tutelary, and all-powerful form of government, but elected by the people.  They combine the principle of centralization and that of popular sovereignty, this gives them a respite: they console themselves for being in tutelage by the reflection that they have chosen their own guardians.  Every  man allows himself to be put in leading-strings, because he sees that it is not a person or a class of people, but the people at large who hold the end of his chain.

     By this system the people shake off their state of dependence just long enough to select their master and then relapse into it again.  A great many persons at the present day are quite contented with this sort of compromise between administrative despotism and the sovereignty of the people; and they think they have done enough for the protection of individual freedom when they have surrendered it to the power of the nation at large.  This does not satisfy me: the nature of him I am to obey signifies less to me than the fact of extorted obedience.