How Well does Conservative Describe Burke's Political Philosophy - Assignment Example

How well does conservative describe Burkes political philosophy Introduction In order to understand the role of Burke’s theory within modern philosophy it is necessary to proceed primarily to a general presentation of his work (mentioning the social and political areas on which Burke refers in his work). In fact, Burke dealt mostly with the morality in the particular social and political areas. In fact, his comments on Revolution in France had caused a severe criticism; it was clear that Burke was against the Revolution, but that was not expressed clearly. It was through a justification of desire for order and piece that such an idea could be identified. In a short biography published in the Encyclopaedia Britannica (2004) it is stated that ‘British statesman, parliamentary orator, and political thinker prominent in public life from 1765 to about 1795 and important in the history of political theory; he championed conservatism in opposition to Jacobinism in Reflections on the Revolution in France (1790)’ (Encyclopaedia Britannica, 2004) . In fact, the support of conservatism by Burke was clear. However, as already stated above it was because such a view was not clearly expressed that Burke was not considered to be a supporter of conservatism. Towards the above direction, it is noticed by Parkin (1956, 1) that ‘it is commonly affirmed that the peculiar genius of Burke lay in his capacity to contemplate the sphere of politics under the aspect of moral law, to reach out for the unchanging principles of morality in the contingencies of political action’. In other words, Burke was actively involved in politics. However, his participation was not direct; he kept on writing (and publishing) his views trying to influence the development of specific political and social ideas within the British society. In other countries also his work influenced the philosophical thought; this influence was not catalytic, i.e. his ideas were hardly adopted in their full content; they were more likely to be used for the justification of theories and principles that referred to morality and political framework in that particular period. It is for this reason that Parkin notices: ‘yet the study of his political thought hardly seems to have accorded the moral question the priority which it deserves; if, in Burkes opinion, the principles of true politics are those of morality enlarged, the most important question to ask about Burke must be what precisely, for him, the principles of morality were’ (Parkin, 1956, 1). In accordance with the above view, one of the main weaknesses of Burke’s theories has been the absence of sufficient justification. This fact could have the following two explanations: Burke did not want his ideas to be clearly understood (it was preferable for every person to ‘interpret’ them in accordance with his/ her needs) or Burke did not give a clear justification to his thoughts in order to protect their validity through the time. In other words, more ‘generic’ theories were more difficult to be rejected if social or political conditions of the society were to change. 2. Burke’s political philosophy – description and characteristics As already stated above, one of the main characteristics of Burke’s political philosophy has been the strong support to current order and principles. In other words, social change was severely criticized as not welcomed. Regarding this issue it is noticed that for Burke ‘social change is not merely possible but also inevitable and desirable; but the scope and the role of thought operating as a reforming instrument on society as a whole is limited; it should act under the promptings of specific tensions or specific possibilities, in close union with the detailed process of change, rather than in large speculative schemes involving extensive interference with the stable, habitual life of society’ (Encyclopaedia Britannica, 2004). The above views of Burke can be identified throughout his papers. In fact there was no effort made by the above theorist to ‘hide’ his preference towards the existed order in society. Sometimes, this preference for ‘social stability’ was explained as a desire for piece. On the other hand, morality was also used in order to justify the refusal of Burke for social change: social change would be sometimes considered as related with lack of morality. The social and political conditions in the era of Burke (both in Britain and internationally) were extremely difficult. In fact, severe social turbulences were taking place across Europe because of the social inequalities as expressed mainly by the inequality in the distribution of wealth and the level of wages. Regarding this issue, it is noticed by Cook (1936, 681) that ‘the philosophy Burke applies to these problems is that of a man who, born in an oppressed country, has, after considerable effort, gained for himself a recognized position in the land of the oppressor; coming from the sober middle class, well educated, he finds that the system is favorable to the right talents, and, while proud, he accepts and eagerly defends a hierarchy headed by wise and condescending aristocrats whom he cannot but admire’. The political philosophy of Burke has been extensively analyzed in literature. In this context, it is stated that ‘two thoughts are central to Burkes reflections: a sense of the limitations of human reason, and a sense of the wisdom of the past; Burke saw in the French Revolution a folly more profound and more dangerous than anything received from the past; the laws and institutions received from the past had emerged little by little in response to diverse practical needs’ (Hudelson, 1999, 41). In other words, as already stated above, the opposition of Burke to the French Revolution was clear. Revolution was considered to be an action not justified not because the social and political conditions were not unfair for the citizens of the country in that period but mostly because it was an action against the law which is considered by Burke to be always proper and justified (perhaps the fact that his father was a solicitor and Burke himself was a member of the House of Commons for about thirty years could justify his opinions on this issue). The views of Burke on the justification of the French Revolution had been strongly criticized. In this context, Strauss et al. (1963, 601) supported that ‘Burke made his nearest approach to a formal political theory in answer to the radical ideology associated with the French Revolution; his opponents, of whom Thomas Paine was one and Rousseau another, argued their case against the ancient and established order of Europe on the basis of the natural and imprescriptible rights of men; but Burkes defense of the old order did not entail a simple rejection of the idea of nature as a norm for the social life of men’. The justification of the views presented above can be found to the fact that – as already mentioned above – Burke avoided explaining clearly his thoughts (which could be later interpreted widely); however his opposition to the French Revolution was clear and it was for this reason that many theorists of his era criticized his work. 3. Burke’s political philosophy and conservatism – interaction and mutual influence As already stated above, the political philosophy of Burke is characterized by a strong support of conservatism. In order to justify his support for conservatism Burke often used the principles of natural law. Regarding this issue, it is noticed by Parkin (1956, 10) that ‘it seems clear that Burke accepts the traditional doctrine of natural rights, not only in his pre-Revolutionary writings, but in his attack on the "Rights of Man"; and that to that degree he argues from the same assumptions as his opponents’. In other words, despite the fact that Burke used the natural rights as a justification for the continuation of current order (status) in societies around the world he could not effectively explain the involvement of natural rights in the justification of existed social inequalities (that had led to the severe social and political turbulences in the particular period, the example of the French Revolution is the most characteristic case of this kind). From another point of view, Burke supported that opposition against the current social conditions (as formulated and monitored by the law and the governmental authorities) could be considered as opposition against the morals. In this context is supported by Parkin (1956) that despite the fact that French Revolution was based on the need for improvement of social morals (in terms of application of the principles related with social justice and equality) ‘it was a mood of enthusiasm which Burke conspicuously did not share; the French rulers justify everything by their warm good intentions, and secure in these, they have complete confidence in themselves’ (Parkin, 1956, 89). The opposition of Burke against the French Revolution is extensively analyzed because it is this opposition that mainly reveals his ‘trend’ to conservatism. And in any case, there was no effort made by Burke to hide his preference for conservatism using as a justification – as stated above – the need for piece and stability (social, political and ultimately financial). In fact, it has been proved that ‘Burkes rhetorical theory recognizes not only constitutional acts, but the constitutions beneath these constitutions, which rest, in turn, on further constitutions; as a result, the Burkean critic is primed to inquire beneath the sedimented "foundations" of acts, to recognize the political (and never-ending) process of interpretation that results in the taken-for-granted grounds of symbolic action’ (Crable, 2003, 118). In accordance with the above, Burke’s theory was extensively based on the fact that social activities that are related with opposition against the existed political order tend to create severe turbulences in the particular country’s constitutional framework. . Because of his thoughts on conservatism, Burke was strongly criticized by theorists of his era but also of modern theorists. Towards this direction, Greenberg (2002, 4) when referring to Burke states that ‘his traditionalism linked the present to the past, but also, just as importantly, to the future; it was rational, not sentimental; Burkes argument that time was of the essence in political life, not as swift, decisive action but as slow, accumulated "habitudes," would prove as true for democratic as for aristocratic rule; in an age of revolution, custom was the enemy blocking the way to change’. It should be noticed that the opposition of Burke towards any attempted social change was not just an issue of personal view; it was rather a severe violation of the country’s Constitutional principle and in this way even its punishment could be justified. For this reason, Burke could be characterized as an active supporter of conservatism. However, his views – in accordance with the method used for their justification – could be also used by authorities in order to justify the punishment of specific social reactions towards existed governmental practices. It is well known that in the era of Burke, political philosophy could have a strong influence on the governmental initiatives. This phenomenon can be explained by the fact that philosophers and other theorists in the era of Burke had the power to create severe social turbulences as their views influenced the society. 4. Conclusion The development of the above issues regarding the work of Burke in the area of political philosophy can lead to the assumption that Burke was an active supporter of conservatism. However, there are also other views like the one of Cook (1936, 681) who stated that ‘his outlook is an interesting combination of conservatism and liberalism; perhaps this may be more accurately stated as follows: government is difficult, and it is above all necessary to preserve what has been gained in the long struggle and experimentation of centuries; but since men are beings of experience and feeling, living in a world where, if the present is conditioned by the past, it still has its own existence’ (Cook, 1936, 681). It should be noticed that most of the theorists in the area of political philosophy (like Kirk, 1997) support the existence of conservatism in the views and the theories of Burke. On the other hand, there are others, like Hoffman et al., 1956, who believe that Burke presented a particular theoretical trend that was extremely powerful in his era; the support for the existed political power and the prohibition of social changes were common phenomena in the particular era. For this reason, Burke could be considered as just an indicative representative of the conservatism trend in the era of political philosophy as expressed in the specific period. There was no specific opposition to attempted social changes but just considerations and advice on the potential outcomes of social initiatives. The view that will be accepted finally as more justified will be the one that is more appropriate in accordance with the social and political conditions of each period of history. References Encyclopaedia Britannica (2004) Edmund Burke, [Online], available at http://www.gwleibniz.com/britannica_pages/burke_edmund/burke_edmund.html Greenberg, M. (2002) Burke & Political Liberty. New Criterion, 20(7): 4 Hoffman, R., Burke, E. (1956) Edmund Burke, New York Agent: With His Letters to the New York Assembly and Intimate Correspondence with Charles OHara, 1761-1776. American Philosophical Society Hudelson, R. (1999) Modern Political Philosophy. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe Kirk, R. (1997) Edmund Burke: A Genius Reconsidered. Wilmington, DE.: ISI Books Parkin, C. (1956) The Moral Basis of Burkes Political Thought: An Essay. Cambridge Somerset, H., Burke, E. (1957) A Note-Book of Edmund Burke. Cambridge, England: University Press Strauss, L., Cropsey, J. (1963) History of Political Philosophy. Chicago: Rand McNally The Library of Economics and Liberty (2002) Burke Edmund, Select Works of Edmund Burke, [Online], available at http://www.econlib.org/Library/LFBooks/Burke/brkSWv4c8.html Read More