He also described the English aristocracy, the landowning nobles, as "the great Oaks that shade a Country and perpetuate your benefits from Generation to Generation. Burke was not enthusiastic about democracy. He defended the English monarchy based on inherited succession. He consistently opposed expanding the right to vote beyond property owners, who made up only a minority of the English population.
Moreover, Burke warned, "democracy has many striking points of resemblance to tyranny," including the "cruel oppression" of the minority. Burke summarized the British Constitution by saying, "We have an inheritable crown, an inheritable peerage [House of Lords], and a House of Commons and a people inheriting privileges, franchises [voting rights], and liberties from a long line of ancestors. King George loved it. Others, like the American patriot, Thomas Paine, condemned it.
Burke himself warned of the "French disease" of revolution, spreading throughout Europe and even to Britain. Burke split with the leadership of the Whig Party when he spoke in favor of war against revolutionary France. Britain declared war in when it joined other European monarchies already fighting the French army.
But no longer supported by the Whig Party, Burke decided to retire from Parliament the following year. He continued writing about the French threat. He also wrote in favor of the free market setting wages and opposed government support for the poor. This was the job of private charity not government, he said. He argued that burdensome taxes would lead only to the poverty of all. Edmund Burke died of cancer at his estate in Despite his superb debating skills, Burke was on the losing side of most major issues during his long career in Parliament.
This was mostly because his Whig Party was usually in the minority. Edmund Burke believed that he should use his independent judgment and vote for the national interest even if this went against the views of those who elected him.
Do you agree or disagree with him? Burke defended the revolution in America but condemned the one in France. Was he consistent or inconsistent in applying his conservative principles? Ayling, Stanley. Edmund Burke, His Life and Opinions. New York: St. Kramnick, Isaac, ed. The Portable Edmund Burke [speeches and writings]. New York: Penguin Books, Based on his conservative principles, would Edmund Burke be likely to favor or oppose the following developments in the United States?
Use evidence from the article to back up your answer on each development. The increase in the number of people allowed to vote, which has taken place over the past years minorities, women, young people over The First Amendment to the U.
Constitution, which reads in part: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble. Form small groups for students to compare and discuss whether they think Burke would favor or oppose each development. Alumni Volunteers The Boardroom Alumni. Curriculum Materials. Add Event. Main Menu Home. Westminster Edmund Burke: The Father of Conservatism Burke was a statesman and political thinker who dominated debates in the British Parliament during the late s.
Ireland, India, and the French Revolution Following the American Revolution, Burke took unpopular positions on other controversial issues. Retirement, Death, and Legacy Burke split with the leadership of the Whig Party when he spoke in favor of war against revolutionary France. For Discussion and Writing 1. How did Edmund Burke and Thomas Paine differ in their vision of government? For Further Reading Ayling, Stanley. Students should first independently investigate and answer this question: Based on his conservative principles, would Edmund Burke be likely to favor or oppose the following developments in the United States?
The Social Security system. The war in Iraq. Finally, each group should report the results of its conclusions to the rest of the class. Yet before long, his personal interest in the colonies would be matched by his resolute intellectual engagement. Other schemes in the interim absorbed Burke: he continued his literary pursuits but also became a man of business, accepting the post of secretary to William Gerard Hamilton, then stationed at the Board of Trade, in From to , Burke opened each instalment of the journal with a historical survey of the current war being fought between the British Empire and the French.
Contention in one strategically sensitive part of the Empire rapidly triggered a reaction in another. The collision in America was by far the most important and so, when not dreaming of transporting his family to the colonies, Burke was immersed in fathoming the political economy of the New World. This entailed examining patterns of trade and manufacture as well as the structures of colonial law and administration.
He never subsequently alluded to his role in the Account , and it seems that he abandoned some of its leading principles. Essentially, Burke celebrated commercial regulation in the s but supported a freer trade from around the middle of the s.
In , he accepted the position of secretary to the Marquis of Rockingham, who was just forming a new ministry under George III. Within months, Burke secured a seat in the House of Commons, entering parliament in January Burke believed that empires might either be founded for trade, or else for the purpose of fiscal extraction.
The state of the American colonies was the dominant issue in British politics. The Rockinghamites had just decided to repeal the Stamp Act and then to bind the colonies under the terms of a Declaratory Act. They next addressed themselves to commercial arrangements in the West Indies.
Over the course of his first seven months in parliament, Burke deepened his understanding of conditions throughout the Empire. He embarked on a review of the navigation laws, hoping to find a way of securing the subordination of the provinces by controlling their commerce while concomitantly liberalising trade. In general terms, under conditions of ongoing competition between the French and British empires, increased commercial freedom for Burke would still mean the subordination of the colonies to metropolitan oversight.
Yet he also thought that residual restrictions on provincial trade should not be compounded by interference in the American system of domestic revenue collection. Crude attempts to combine the two risked stirring resentment among provincial populations.
Although it was obvious that the American colonies had originally been established for the sake of commercial expansion, the British government had latterly come to view them in terms of their tax-yielding potential. This perspective began in under George Grenville, but it then continued under William Pitt and his successors.
From the import duties imposed in by Charles Townshend to the passage of the Tea Act under Lord North in , the mother country continued to manage its Empire by levying taxes as well as enforcing tariffs.
B urke was wary of the Americans. Their religious convictions, he believed, disposed them towards recalcitrance, while their political history encouraged a spirit of defiance. They were self-righteous and liable to be hectoring in their assertion of liberty. This applied to the arrogance of the slave-owning South as well as to the rebellious disposition of the North. Yet if the British wished to perpetuate American membership of the Empire, it was necessary to accommodate the colonial character.
The demeanour of the colonists was certainly fractious, but they were never systematically subversive. Burke thought that, for the most part, the Americans were driven by an underlying loyalty, and so winning their consent remained a realistic plan.
Despite this option, successive British governments stoked the mood of intransigence, animated by an overblown sense of imperial pride. In being affronted by the audacity of the Americans, the British ministry began to fear for its own dignity. Instead of bolstering its standing by public acts of goodwill, the government resorted to shows of strength. In particular, a series of political needs, intellectual strategies and pedagogic responses came together.
A Whig who had deserted the radicals in response to the French Revolution became a model cited to provide a back history for Liberals who joined the Conservatives in opposition to Home Rule. At the same time, Burke was also of value to Gladstone, for whom, as Jones notes, Home Rule was part of a process of continuous constitutional evolution and Burke was both a guide to the possibilities of change and a guarantor of fundamental continuity.
As Jones shows, far more was involved. She emphasises the value of Burke to late 19th-century Conservatives, fearful of attacks on property, religion and constitution. Burke was deployed to present a positive, historically informed, organic Conservatism capable of appropriate reform.
0コメント