Tocqueville’s methodology has been the subject of many studies. Some pioneering approaches can be found in the texts of Saguiv A. Hadari (1989), Harvey Mansfield and Delba Winthrop (2006), and John C. Koritansky (2010). Jon Elster (2009), Aurelian Craiutu (2009), and Cheryl Welch (2001, 2006) have also examined Tocqueville’s methodology. This includes, in particular, his comparative approach, which allows Tocqueville to consider not only American democracy, but also social and political change in France, England and Switzerland. As Craiutu (2016) has shown, Tocqueville’s comparison also has a temporal dimension. Thus, Tocqueville makes historical distinctions between seventeenth- and eighteenth-century England and developments in New England, as well as between the Ancien Regime and French society after the Restoration. It is only through such structural analyses that Tocqueville’s insights into the political culture of each country and how it changed can be understood, revealing both the historically grown particularities and the alternative possibilities for development resulting from the respective path dependencies.