Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 1:56:18 — 106.6MB)
On Reflections on the Revolution in France (1790).
Writing after the revolution but before the terror, Burke was alarmed at intellectual fads in England that paid homage to the principles driving what happened in France: the right of people to choose their own government, to elect their leaders, and depose those that violate citizens' rights. So, given that these principles have won the day, why would we possibly care about what a reactionary monarchist had to say against them? Why is Burke revered as an intellectual grandfather to modern conservatism?
Well, first, given what happened in France with the terror, Burke's worries were warranted. While he thought that revolution was justified in extreme circumstances (when "necessity" dictates), the ground for such a revolution (as with the so-called Glorious Revolution of 1688 in England) should be an appeal something more ancient, more well-grounded by tradition. The idea should not be to treat the revolution as an excuse to devise a new, ideal government from scratch based on abstract principles. Live, flesh-and-blood people and their real concerns are more important than these abstract ideals, and societies are not laboratories for experimentation.
While we equate political freedom with rights and well-being, Burke thinks that democracy leads to mob rule and the suppression of rights, and that an emphasis on abstract rights can prevent the government from protecting what he considers our real rights as citizens for protection by the state. While he thinks that people's interests need to be represented, and that corruption needs to be remedied and beneficial reforms adopted, the most important thing is stability, and society's wisdom built up over the ages is our best guide to this.
Burke thinks that law and culture are intertwined, and while it's possible to change laws on a dime, this will have negative consequences unless supporting social structures, created through tradition and maintained through religion and mores, provide necessary support. Liberty needs the support of wisdom and virtue, and Burke admires the honor-based motivation of a noble class that already has enough money, whereas he thinks that the merchant-types put in charge of the French assembly have been incentivized to use the government for their own financial gain.
Mark, Seth, Wes, and Dylan cogitate on Burke's lush, highly repetitive prose and try to figure out what this text has to teach us about good government today. For example, Burke thinks too much idealism leaves us indifferent to real and present (e.g., Trumpian) danger, so DON'T EVEN THINK OF NOT VOTING.
You may also want to review our ep. 3 on Thomas Hobbes, Burke's predecessor in this line of thinking. See also Aristotle's case for aristocracy as discussed in our ep. 60 on his Politics.
Buy the book
The Burke picture is by Sterling Bartlett.
Awesome! With my own interest in late 18thC and early 19thC history and thought, I have wanted to read more Burke for some time.
When I listen to things like this I think about how uniquely human it is to want things to be fair or equal. How there is complete acceptance of survival of the fittest and the whole pack Heirarchy in nature. (I have a lot more empathy and care for social inequality than it sounds like here) But there is a disdain for this guy that I find mysterious. Hindsight is always 20/20. We used to have gladiators for entertainment or crying out loud. Can’t it be that he was not just a privileged jerk, rather he was as evolved as he could be? And in keeping with being able to not know anything Bout this topic as your preamble suggests – didn’t Plato have some screwed up ideas about slavery? Isn’t this a person we look to for guidance about justice? I think that reading with charity would mean that you sort of put aside the part where he is kind of an elitist and consider how embedded in society that idea was. You mention reading someone else to get a better perspective. I ask this
Ugh – couldn’t edit – couldn’t delete. Any who – just meant to say – isn’t there something kind of crazy about living in the here and now and looking back on someone whose mindset we couldn’t even begin to understand and feeling this level of condemnation toward him. Maybe I sensed some that may not have been there but someone mentioned their teacher eviscerating this guy in class.
49-50 mins in…Mark those ARE the guys ruling the roost..those money lenders and your focusing on a class or group,..but ignoring the systemic corruption,the system..your ignoring the power of the interest thru those people….its not a stereotype if its true and archetypes are real..the power of interest are real…otherwise cause and effect and the aspect of determinism that come from that mean nothing….
Great podcast guys. I always appreciate your balance, depth, and ability to play devils advocate when discussing a work.
So in listening to this podcast I caught myself long reflecting on Burke’s reverence for tradition. As a big fan of historian Will Durant, I couldn’t help but think of two of Durant’s commentaries in a similar vein.
The first being something I would have imagined Burke himself saying,
“So the conservative who resists change is as valuable as the radical who proposes it — perhaps as much more as the roots are more vital than grafts. It is good that new ideas should be heard, for the sake of the few that can be used; but it is also good that new ideas should be compelled to go through the mill of objection, opposition, and contumely; this is the trial heat which innovations must survive before being allowed to enter the human race. It is good that the old should resist the young, and that the young should prod the old; out of this tension, as out of the strife of the sexes and the classes, comes a creative tensile strength, a stimulated development, a secret and basic unity and movement of the whole.”
There really is something to be said for giving a healthy respect to tradition as what becomes traditional was put through the very real tests of history. This isn’t to say certain refinements aren’t necessary or desirable but it seems we live in a culture that is presently moving very fast and it seems that we may be on the verge of a very similar revolution to that of France in 1789. I’m making no prediction here but we do seem to be a society that has lost a healthy respect for tradition, even looks down on it, and seems to revere change merely for the sake of change. Whats new seems to be thought of as better by virtue of being new rather than by virtue of its intellectual and moral merit.
The second Durant quote that I was reminded of when listening to this podcast hearkens to a very specific part of tradition we have been throwing off and continue to do so to this day. That is, the sexual mores, that have been in place for thousands of years.
Durant comments,
“No one man, however brilliant or well-informed, can come in one lifetime to such fullness of understanding as to safely judge and dismiss customs or institutions of his society, for these are the wisdom of the generations after centuries of experiment in the laboratory of history. A youth boiling with hormones will wonder why he should not give full freedom to his sexual desires; and if he`s unchecked by custom, morals or laws, he may ruin his life before he matures sufficiently to understand that sex is a river of fire that must be banked and cooled by a hundred restraints if it is not to consume in chaos both the individual and the group.”
Being coheirs to the legacy of the sexual revolution this type of traditional thinking when it comes to sexual ethics seems almost foreign to us (it certainly was to me growing up). But it seems that in throwing off the marital and sexual expectations of unity, complementarity, permanence, exclusivity, sanctity and fidelity for the “wisdom” of the sexual revolution we have paid a heavy price particularly with regards to the state of marriage, family, and life.
This seems to be the clearest modern example of throwing off the wisdom contained in tradition and paying a price for it. In a way that parallels the French Revolution, we seem to have thrown off the wisdom of history in a particular sphere of life, and in that sphere a certain form of chaos has resulted.