Biography
Burke advocated a more tolerant attitude towards the English colonies in America and insisted that the government repeal the Stamp Act, which provided for taxation of the colonies and caused great discontent among the colonists. He criticized English rule in Ireland, especially for its discrimination against Catholics. Burke was against George III's attempts to strengthen royal power and argued for the need to create political parties that could defend their clear and firm principles.
For many years, Burke advocated reforming the administration of colonial India, which at the time was under the control of the East India Company. In 1785, he succeeded in removing the most talented and successful of all the British viceroys of India, Warren Hastings, from the management of the company. Burke and Hastings had an ideological dispute that has not lost its relevance today: Burke insisted on the strict implementation of British laws in India as based on natural law inherent in all people without exception, and Hastings countered with the fact that Western ideas about law and legality in general not applicable in the East.
The outbreak of the French Revolution in 1789 put an end to Burke's long friendship with the leader of the English liberals, Charles Fox. Like many other individual freedom activists, Fox welcomed the events in France, while Burke viewed them extremely negatively, considered them a terrible demonstration of mob power, and criticized them harshly. In Reflections on the French Revolution, published in 1790 and opening a still-unfinished debate, Burke showed his conviction that freedom could only exist within the framework of law and order and that reform should be carried out in an evolutionary rather than a revolutionary way . As a result, Burke's views prevailed and convinced the majority of Whigs to support the decision of the Tory government of William Pitt the Younger to enter the war with France. This work went down in the history of social thought as a classic presentation of the principles of conservative ideology.
Political Views
Burke's political views were most consistently reflected in his pamphlets against the French Revolution. Burke was the first to subject the ideology of the French revolutionaries to systematic and ruthless criticism. He saw the root of evil in the neglect of traditions and values inherited from ancestors, in the fact that the revolution thoughtlessly destroys the spiritual resources of society and the cultural and ideological heritage accumulated over centuries. He contrasted the radicalism of the French revolutionaries with the unwritten British constitution and its core values: concern for political continuity and natural development, respect for practical tradition and concrete rights instead of the abstract idea of law, speculative constructions and innovations based on them. Burke believed that society should accept for granted the existence of a hierarchical system among people, and that, due to the imperfection of any human tricks, artificial redistribution of property could turn into a disaster for society.
Essays
A Philosophical Inquiry into the Origin of Our Ideas of the Sublime and the Beautiful
His youthful work on the origin of our ideas of the sublime and beautiful, published in 1756, but written much earlier, perhaps already at the age of 19, attracted the attention of Lessing and Herder and acquired an important place in the history of aesthetic theories. Already thanks to its basic idea, it contributed to the general change that took place in the aesthetic sphere of England and Germany. This was a path from the rigid norms of previous artistic taste to a more lively and spiritual art. Burke believed that to discover aesthetic laws, one should proceed not from the works of art themselves, but from the spiritual motivations of a person.
Publications in Russian
- A Philosophical Inquiry into the Origin of Our Ideas of the Sublime and Beautiful. M.: Art, 1979 (History of aesthetics in monuments and documents)
- Reflections on the revolution in France. London: Overseas Publications Interchange Ltd, 1992 (same: M.: Rudomino, 1993)
- The key to success is not the presence, but the absence of talent.... Early essays // Questions of literature. 2008. No. 1.
Literature
- M. V. Belov, A. I. Vitaleva. Edmund Burke - early ideologist of the British Empire. - Dialogue with time. Almanac of Intellectual History, 34, 2011,
English orator, statesman and political thinker Edmund Burke was born on January 12, 1729 in Dublin. His father was a trial attorney and Protestant, and his mother was a Catholic. Edmund decided to connect his life with jurisprudence. In 1750 he moved to London and entered the school of barristers (lawyers).
Beginning of literary activity
Over time, Burke lost interest in his profession. Moreover, he did not return to Dublin. The young man did not like Ireland because of its provincialism. Remaining in London, he devoted himself to literature.
The first essay, “In Defense of Natural Society,” appeared in 1756. This work was a parody of the work of the recently deceased English Henry Bolingbroke and was passed off as his essay. The first books that Burke Edmund wrote are practically unknown to posterity and do not represent anything interesting. These experiences were important for the creative growth of the author himself.
Confession
Burke's first serious work was A Philosophical Inquiry into the Origin of Our Ideas of the High and Beautiful. After the publication of this work in 1757, the most eminent thinkers of that era drew attention to the author: Lessing, Kant and Diderot. acquired a recognized reputation among writers. In addition, the research allowed him to launch his own political career.
Another serious success of the writer in those years was the Annual Register magazine. Burke Edmund served as its editor-in-chief, and Robert Dodsley became its publisher. In 1758-1765 the Irishman wrote many articles in this publication, which became an important part of his creative heritage. Burke published especially a lot of materials on history in the Annual Register. However, he never admitted that he worked for the magazine and published articles anonymously.
Political career
In 1759 Burke entered government service. For a while, he almost abandoned his literary activity, since it brought in almost no money. Two years earlier, Bork Edmund had married Jane Nugent. The couple had two sons. The issue of finance has become more pressing than ever. As a result, Burke became the personal secretary of diplomat William Hamilton. Working with him, the writer acquired important political experience.
In 1765, Burke quarreled with Hamilton and became unemployed. the years spent in London as a writer, working as a secretary - all this is a thing of the past. Now we had to start everything from scratch. The difficulties did not frighten the publicist who was left without income. At the end of the year he entered the House of Commons, having been elected through Wendover County.
Member of parliament
Burke's main patron in parliament was the Marquess of Rockingham in 1765-1766. held the position of Prime Minister. When he resigned and became the head of the opposition to the new government, it was his protégé, who left Hamilton, who became the main mouthpiece of an influential politician in the highest circles of power. Parliament immediately drew attention to such a rare and talented speaker as Edmund Burke. The writer's books soon remained in the shadow of his public appearances.
The member of the House of Commons had captivating eloquence. His previous writing skills also came in handy in parliament. Burke himself prepared his many reports and speeches before the Lords. He knew how to summarize colossal amounts of information and operate with scattered facts. The thinker was a member of parliament for almost 28 years, and all these years he remained a popular and sought-after speaker, whom people listened to with bated breath.
Pamphleteer
Burke wrote not only philosophical books. He wrote pamphlets that were written specifically for the Whig party. Thus, in 1770, “Thoughts on the Cause of the Present Discontent” were published. In this document, the author gave his definition of a party as an instrument of politics and argued for the defense of its government. The pamphlet was critical. Burke condemned the king's associates, who determined his position on a variety of issues.
In 1774 Burke was elected to represent Bristol, then the second most important city in England. In parliament, the politician began to defend the interests of local merchants and industrialists. The break with the Bristolians occurred after the writer began to advocate a policy of reconciliation with Irish Catholics.
American question
In the 1770s, Burke wrote a lot about America. He also dedicated his public speeches in parliament to the rebel colonists. At that time, this question worried all the British. In 1774, the speech “On Taxation in America” was delivered and published, in 1775 - “Reconciliation with the Colonies.”
Burke looked at the problem from the point of view of conservatism and pragmatism. He wanted to achieve the preservation of the colonies within the British Empire by any possible means. Therefore, he was a supporter of the policy of compromise. The parliamentarian believed that in order to find a common language with the Americans, you need to carefully study her inner life, and only build your position on the basis of this knowledge. Burke proposed reducing taxes on trade with America, since only such a policy would save at least some income, whereas otherwise Great Britain would simply lose its colonies. There was a very small group of lords in Parliament who took the same position as Burke. The history of relations between the metropolis and the colonies has shown that he was right.
Burke and the French Revolution
It began in 1789. At its first stage, the majority of British residents supported those dissatisfied with the Bourbons. Edmund Burke also closely followed the events in Paris. “Reflections on the Revolution in France” is his book, which appeared in 1790 and reflected the thinker’s views on the situation in this state. In a 400-page pamphlet, the author described in detail the main principles and patterns of events in the neighboring country. Burke wrote his book primarily for his compatriots. With its help, he hoped to warn the British against solidarity with the revolutionary masses in France. In “Reflections,” Burke’s ideology of conservatism was most clearly reflected in Burke’s work.
The writer believed that revolution was dangerous because of its excessive attachment to theory. The dissatisfied in France spoke of abstract rights, preferring them to traditional, established state institutions. Burke was not only a conservative. He believed in the classical ideas of Aristotle and Christian theologians, believing that it was on them that an ideal society should be built. In “Reflections,” the politician criticized the Enlightenment theory that with the help of reason a person can penetrate any secrets of existence. For him, the ideologists of the French Revolution were inexperienced statesmen who only knew how to speculate on the interests of society.
Meaning of "Reflections"
"Reflections on the Revolution in France" became Burke's most important work as a political thinker. Immediately after its publication, the book became the subject of wide public discussion. She was praised and criticized, but no one could remain indifferent to what she wrote. Burke's previous philosophical books were also popular, but it was the pamphlet on the revolution that hit the most painful European nerve. All residents of the Old World understood that a new era was coming when civil society, with the help of revolution, could replace the unwanted government. This phenomenon was treated diametrically opposite, which was reflected in the writer’s work.
The book carried a premonition of disaster. The revolution did lead to a long crisis and numerous Napoleonic wars in Europe. The pamphlet also became a model of perfect command of the English literary language. Writers such as Matthew Arnold, Leslie Stephen and William Hazlitt unanimously considered Burke a consummate master of prose, and the Reflections the most significant manifestation of his talent.
Last years
After the publication of Reflections, Burke's life went downhill. Due to ideological differences with his colleagues, he found himself isolated in the Whig Party. In 1794, the politician resigned, and a few months later his son Richard died. Burke was alarmed by events in Ireland, where a radical national movement was growing.
Meanwhile, Great Britain began a war with revolutionary France. After the campaign dragged on, a peaceful mood reigned in London. The government wanted to compromise with the Directory. Burke, although not a politician and without authority, continued to speak and write publicly. He was a supporter of war to the bitter end and opposed any kind of peace with the revolutionaries. In 1795, the publicist began work on a series of “Letters on Peace with the Regicides.” Two of them were written. Burke did not have time to finish the third. He died on July 9, 1797.
(Burke, Edmund)
(1729-1797), English statesman, orator and political thinker, best known for his philosophy of conservatism. Born in Dublin on January 12, 1729 in the family of a Protestant lawyer; Burke's mother professed the Roman Catholic faith. He was raised in the spirit of Protestantism. He was educated at Ballitore Boarding School and then at Trinity College, Dublin. Initially he intended to follow the judicial line and in 1750 he moved to London to enter the Middle Temple School of Barristers. Little is known about Burke's first years in England. We know that he lost interest in law, decided not to return to Ireland and devoted himself to literary work. His first essay, A Vindication of Natural Society (1756), was a parody of the works of Viscount Bolingbroke, but was passed off as a posthumously published essay by the latter. Burke wanted to show that Bolingbroke's thoughts on natural religion are superficial and, when applied to political issues, lead to absurd consequences. The essay is an important milestone in Burke's development as a writer and thinker, but in itself it is of little interest. A Philosophical Inquiry into the Origin of Our Ideas of the Sublime and Beautiful (1757) is a more serious work that still attracts the attention of aestheticians. At one time, she impressed D. Diderot, I. Kant and G. E. Lessing and created the author’s reputation among writers, and also played an important role in his political career. Burke's most significant achievement during these years was the publication, together with the publisher Robert Dodsley, of the "Annual Register" (1758). Burke never publicly acknowledged that he was the editor of this magazine, but in all likelihood he wrote most of the articles contained in it, including famous articles on history. He worked on the magazine until 1765, then other writers took up the matter, and today it is difficult to say with certainty which articles belong to Burke and which belong to other authors. According to some accounts, he remained "chief conductor" until 1780, and since five other identified authors were his students, there is no doubt that he continued to influence the contents of the yearbook throughout his life. Having entered politics, Burke did not immediately abandon his literary ambitions. But his writings brought in almost no income; In addition, in 1757 Burke married Jane Mary Nugent and soon became the father of two sons. Therefore, in 1759 he entered the service of William Gerard Hamilton as a private secretary. When Hamilton became chief secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Burke had to spend the winters of 1761 and 1763 in Dublin, where he gained his first political experience. In 1765 a fierce quarrel with Hamilton followed. At thirty-seven years old, Burke found himself out of work, and his income fell to 100 pounds a year, which he received while working on the Annual Register. Nevertheless, he was unenthusiastic about the offer to become private secretary to the young Marquess of Rockingham, who in July 1765 became First Lord of the Treasury (in fact, Prime Minister). From this time on, Burke's political career began. At the end of 1765, with the help of Earl Verney, he became a member of the House of Commons for the county of Wendover. His first speeches at the beginning of 1766 were an extraordinary success. Within a few weeks, Burke had gained a reputation as one of the leading parliamentary politicians. Rockingham resigned in July 1766, but remained the leader of an influential group called the so-called. The Rockingham Whigs remained in opposition for the next sixteen years. Burke spoke on behalf of this group in Parliament, as well as in his writings. The basis of his influence is his success as a speaker. Lacking the sense of tact and flexibility inherent in the great masters of rhetoric, Burke nevertheless sought to obtain complete information about the issues under discussion, was capable of organizing a large amount of material, and knew how to entertain listeners. The reputation of a member of parliament roughly corresponds to the total number of his speeches. During his twenty-eight years in the House of Commons, Burke was always one of the two or three most popular speakers. In addition, Burke served his party as the author of pamphlets and speeches published in printed form. He won his first success in this field with the pamphlet Thoughts on the Cause of the Present Discontents, 1770 - a declaration of the political principles of the Rockingham Whigs. This document contains a well-known definition of a political party and a defense of its role in government. Speculation about the “double cabinet” and in general about the activities of the “friends of the king,” as the politicians under the control of George III were called, were regarded by historians of the twentieth century as unrealistic. Burke's first two fully printed speeches were devoted to the problems of the colonies: On American Taxation, delivered in April 1774 and published in 1775 and On Moving His Resolutions for Conciliation with the Colonies, delivered and published. spring 1775). The same topic was discussed in his famous Letter to the Sheriffs of Bristol, on the Affairs of America, 1777. Burke's thinking about America was pragmatic and conservative. The problem, in his view, was not how to resolve conflicts with the colonies over issues of “right to tax” or “representation,” but how to keep the colonies under Great Britain’s control. This can be done, he believed, only by studying the features of local political life and building a political line accordingly. England, Burke wrote, had gained a lot from trade with America, and she would receive no less even if she did not take a single shilling from her in taxes. This political philosophy failed to convince the English parliament of the time, although in the 19th and 20th centuries. many researchers admired Burke's insight. Burke's activity in Parliament, his interest in commerce and disagreement with government policies towards the colonies impressed the merchants of Bristol, who in 1774 elected him as their representative in the House of Commons. Burke was flattered to be a member of parliament from the second most important English city, and he sought to carry out the orders of his merchant voters to the best of his ability. However, his zeal ceased to please the people of Bristol when he began to express ideas about the need for relaxations in the rules of trade with Ireland, about the reform of insolvency laws and about tolerance for Catholics. Burke lost his seat for Bristol in 1780 and went on to represent the constituency of Malton, which was under the control of Lord Rockingham and the Earl of Fitzwilliam. The souring relationship with Bristol did not damage Burke's reputation, which reached unprecedented heights in the last years of the American Revolution. Those were the years of close collaboration with Charles James Fox - together they waged a constant war of words with the Prime Minister, Lord North. Burke also played an important role in organizing the county petitions of 1779 and 1780 and in the movement for economic reform, aimed mainly at limiting the power of the king and the extent of his influence over parliament. The opposition, which rarely achieved success, was nevertheless active and knew how to make itself heard. Burke's private life during these years also cannot be called unsuccessful. He continues to communicate with Samuel Johnson, Oliver Goldsmith, David Garrick and Joshua Reynolds, is friends with scientists and artists, supports Fanny Burney and discovers George Crabb. His family life was unusually happy. The Beaconsfield estate was a source of joy to him. He loved guests and took a break from politics by doing agricultural work. After 16 years in opposition, Rockingham's group came to power in March 1782. Burke was appointed not a member of the cabinet, but the chief military paymaster. This position was much less lucrative than before the reforms that Burke himself promoted. But even what little this post gave was lost with the death of Rockingham in July 1782. Burke's position in the party was shaken. He supported Fox in his steps to dismiss the government of Lord Shelburne, and entered into an unsuccessful alliance with Lord North, which, however, allowed him to regain the position of military treasurer for a short time. When George III and William Pitt the Younger achieved success against the coalition in 1784, Burke returned to the ranks of the opposition. Now Fox was real, and the Duke of Portland was the figurehead of a party in which Burke was gradually losing influence. His main efforts in the 1780s were aimed at investigating the activities of the East India Company, which led to the resignation of the Governor-General of Bengal Warren Hastings in 1787 and a trial that lasted seven years. Burke himself repeated many times that “Indian” works were the main work of his life. However, modern historians are less interested in this stage of his political activity than in other aspects. It is generally accepted that Burke was extremely unfair to Hastings. But time dictated its conditions. It was necessary to attract public attention to the moral problems of imperial rule, and only a demand for resignation could somehow contribute to reform. And if British rule in India in the 19th century. became more scrupulous than in the 18th century, then this is partly the merit of Burke. At the height of the Indian campaign, another, more important political issue arose in full force, concerning the French Revolution of 1789. Burke was one of the first to sense the extreme importance of events in France. In November 1790, when British sympathies were still with the revolutionaries, he published his Reflections on the Revolution in France, a pamphlet of more than 400 pages in which he examined the main political principles of the revolution. Burke was poorly informed about what was happening in France; in any case, his primary concern was the impact of “French principles” on English citizens. Burke saw the danger of revolution in its blind adherence to theory, its preference for abstract rights over traditional institutions and customs, and its contempt for experience. Burke himself believed in the classical traditions, coming from Aristotle, and in the Christian traditions, of which he considered the English theologian Richard Hooker to be a representative. Burke's views can hardly be called systematically pursued pragmatism, but he was deeply distrustful of the “metaphysical speculations” of inexperienced statesmen. Expanding on the ideas of his early writings and speeches on America and even earlier work in Defense of Natural Society, Burke opposed the principles of the Age of Reason - or at least against the arrogance of those who believed that with the help of reason the final mysteries of existence could be penetrated. He believed that only the action of divine providence could explain great historical changes. The reflections fulfilled their immediate purpose and attracted public interest in the ideas and events of the French Revolution. The book caused numerous controversies and responses, among which the most famous is Thomas Paine's pamphlet The Rights of Man (1791-1792). However, the significance of Burke's book does not end there. Despite its roughness of style and errors of fact, the Reflections are Burke's most important work. It most fully expresses the philosophy of conservatism, which is Burke's contribution to world political thought. Reflections are also the main victory won by his eloquence. The book evoked an unusually wide response. At a time when there was no threat of war or invasion, it created a sense of crisis that usually only arises in times of disaster. The book is dedicated to specific events, but has the breadth and depth inherent in an outstanding work of literature. William Hazlitt, Matthew Arnold and Leslie Stephen unanimously call Burke a master of English prose. Reflections are the most striking manifestation of his talent. The last years of Burke's life were filled with anxiety and disappointment. Six months after the publication of the Reflections, in May 1791, he finally and publicly broke with Foxe due to differences in assessment of the French Revolution. For some time this rupture led to Burke's isolation within the Whig Party; he published An Appeal from the New to the Old Whigs in August 1791 to argue that his position followed from the traditional principles of the party. Subsequent events confirmed that Burke was right; in any case, they attracted the party leadership and public opinion to his side. But even the war with France, which began in January 1793, was not the crusade against the Jacobins that Burke called for. He never ceased to remind the government and the public of the need for more decisive action, coordinated with other European powers, that could eliminate the danger of the revolution spreading. Burke's resignation in June 1794 did not bring peace to his soul. Personal tragedy - the death of his only son Richard in August 1794 - plunged Burke into despair, his grief was aggravated by a sense of impending national and world catastrophe. He was sensitive to the decision to acquit Warren Hastings in 1795. Burke was worried about the developments in Ireland, and he believed that only significant concessions to the Catholic majority could prevent revolution in this country. Burke supported the Earl of Fitzwilliam's measures as Lord Lieutenant and felt responsible for the failure of the process when Pitt, as Prime Minister, disavowed Fitzwilliam's actions. The mistakes made by the European coalition in relation to France led him to despair. But despair did not mean surrendering positions. Although Burke considered himself a finished man after the death of his son, he continued to help with advice and support his friends and students: Fitzwilliam, Portland, William Wyndham, as well as Irish patriots and French refugees. Burke's correspondence during these years is more intense than at any other period of his life. Those who thought he was out of the game were wrong. At the end of 1795, the young Duke of Bedford spoke unfriendlyly in the House of Lords about Burke and the amount of his pension. With his response - the famous Letter to a Noble Lord - Burke dealt the Duke a crushing blow. This letter is considered by some historians to be "the most delightful retaliation in the history of English literature." There was also a more serious reason for expressing my thoughts about what was happening. The war with France was going on without much success, and, of course, there were people in England who wanted negotiations and peace. For Burke, nothing could have been more shameful. He considered all French leaders "robbers and murderers" - Danton, Robespierre and the Directory. To believe that it was possible to come to an agreement with such people, Burke believed, meant to engage in self-deception. Late in 1795, provoked by the peaceful sentiments that had been expressed in a pamphlet by his old friend Lord Auckland, Burke began the first of his Letters for Peace with the Regicides. This work was never completed, but was published as a fragment after Burke's death. In Burke's Works the first letter is located in fourth place. The letters, which today are called the first and second (in fact, two parts of a single whole), were published in the fall of 1796 under the title Two Letters... on Proposals for Peace with the Regicide Directory of France). The letter today called the third (written last), like the fourth, is in the nature of a fragment and was published in 1797 after the death of the author. The third letter was never completed. Burke died in Beaconsfield (Buckinghamshire) on July 9, 1797.
LITERATURE
Burke E. Reflections on the revolution in France. M., 1993
- - Belgian psychologist. Biography...
Great psychological encyclopedia
- - - American educator, journalist. President of the San Francisco Normal Schools...
Pedagogical terminological dictionary
- - “Arleigh Burke” destroyer URO » Displacement: 8534 tons. Dimensions: 142.1 m x 18.3 m x 9.1 m. Power plant: three-shaft, gas turbines. Armament: Harpoon and Tomahawk missiles, 127 mm gun. Maximum speed: 30 knots...
Encyclopedia of ships
- - Edmund - English political activist and publicist. From 1766, B. was a member of parliament, and soon rose to the ranks of leading figures in the Whig party...
Soviet historical encyclopedia
- - Dr. med., b. 1843...
- - doctor, r. 1863...
Large biographical encyclopedia
- - Edmund – English, statesman and esthetician. Franz criticized from a conservative position. revolution...
Philosophical Encyclopedia
- - village in dep. Pas-de-Calais, 2 versts from the sea and 5 from the railway. Verton station on the Paris-Boulogne line...
Encyclopedic Dictionary of Brockhaus and Euphron
- - Ilhan, Turkish poet. Graduated from the French department of the Ankara Gazi Pedagogical Institute. Was a teacher...
- - I Robert O'Hara, English explorer of Australia. In 1860 he led an expedition to find a route for the trans-Australian telegraph...
Great Soviet Encyclopedia
- - Berk Ilhan, Turkish poet. Graduated from the French department of the Ankara Gazi Pedagogical Institute. Was a teacher. He was a member of the literary group “Tripod”, which opposed the isolation of poetry from life...
Great Soviet Encyclopedia
- - Leacock Elinor Burke, American ethnographer and sociologist. The author of historical, ethnographic and comparative sociological studies, in which he actively opposes racism and bourgeois sociological theories...
Great Soviet Encyclopedia
- - Edmund, English publicist, political philosopher. One of the first ideologists of conservatism. Defended ancestral traditions and social institutions...
Modern encyclopedia
- - EDMUND BURKE, English statesman, orator and political thinker, best known for his philosophy of conservatism. Born in Dublin on January 12, 1729 in the family of a Protestant lawyer...
Collier's Encyclopedia
- - Edmund Burke English publicist, political figure. Born on January 12, 1729 in Dublin, Ireland, in the family of a Dublin lawyer. He studied at a Quaker school and at Trinity College in Dublin...
- - publicist, philosopher, historian God was pleased to grant humanity enthusiasm in order to compensate for the lack of reason. To be interesting is the first duty of a little-known author...
Consolidated encyclopedia of aphorisms
"BURKE Edmund" in books
Burke
From the book Laws of Success authorBurke Edmund Burke (1729–1797) was an English publicist and philosopher. Forethought is the mother of safety. Clear order is the basis of all success. Anyone who fights with us strengthens our character and improves our skills. Our enemy is ours
What crime did Burke and Hay commit?
From the book The Book of General Delusions by Fry StephenWhat crime did Burke and Hay commit? A man has no right to marry without first studying anatomy and performing an autopsy on at least one woman. Honore de Balzac's Murder. In the early years of the 19th century, the number of students wishing to study anatomy increased sharply.
BURKE
From the book The Leader's Book in Aphorisms author Kondrashov Anatoly PavlovichBURKE Edmund Burke (1729–1797) - English publicist and philosopher. Forethought is the mother of safety. Clear order is the basis of all success. Anyone who fights with us strengthens our character and improves our skills. Our enemy is ours
Body Snatchers Burke and Hare
From the book Bad Old England by Coty KatherineBody Snatchers Burke and Hare Although Jack the Ripper is considered Britain's most notorious criminal, until the 1880s that dubious title was held by Edinburgh men William Burke and William Hare. The murders they committed are associated with such a specific page of the English
Battle at Empress Augusta Bay (Arleigh Burke in action!)
From the book Stronger than the “divine wind”. US Destroyers: War in the Pacific by Roscoe TheodoreBattle of Empress Augusta Bay (Arleigh Burke in action!) When Admiral Koga, stationed on Truk, learned that the Americans had dared to set foot on Bougainville Island, he radioed for a strong retaliatory strike. For this purpose, aircraft began to be assembled in Rabaul. Evening 1
2. Nadine Burke-Harris
From the book How Children Succeed by Taf Paul2. Nadine Burke-Harris So what impact does poverty have on children? On the opposite side of the country from Dozier, Nadine Burke-Harris was asking the same question. But she was a doctor, not a teacher, so she approached the issue from the point of view of the mental health of her
Burke - conservative reaction
From the book History of Philosophy author Skirbekk GunnarBurke - a conservative reaction The Irish-born British philosopher Edmund Burke (1729–1797) is often called the father of conservatism, just as Locke is considered the father of liberalism. Burke's teachings (Reflections on the Revolution in France, 1790)
CARL REINHOLD BURKE
From the book Geniuses and Villains of Russia in the 18th Century author Arutyunov Sarkis ArtashesovichKARL REINHOLD BURK Berk (Swedish by nationality) was in St. Petersburg in the period 1735-1736. It was then that he compiled an interesting handwritten report entitled “Description of St. Petersburg.” And today these testimonies about the state of the capital of the empire are the most valuable historical
Edmund Burke
From the book of Aphorisms author Ermishin OlegEdmund Burke (1729-1797) publicist, philosopher, historian God was pleased to give humanity enthusiasm to compensate for the lack of reason. To be interesting is the first duty of a little-known author. The right to be boring belongs only to those writers who have already
Berk Ilhan
TSBBerk Ilhan Berk Ilhan (b. 1916, Manisa), Turkish poet. Graduated from the French department of the Ankara Gazi Pedagogical Institute (1945). Was a teacher (1945-55). He was a member of the literary group “Tripod”, which opposed the isolation of poetry from life. Poems by B.
Burke Edmund
From the book Great Soviet Encyclopedia (BE) by the author TSBLeacock Elinor Burke
From the book Great Soviet Encyclopedia (LI) by the author TSBBURKE, Edmund
From the book Big Dictionary of Quotes and Catchphrases authorBURKE, Edmund (1729–1797), English publicist and philosopher 225 When your neighbor’s house is on fire, it’s not a bad idea to pour water on your own. "Reflections on the Revolution in France" (1790) ? Knowles, p. 163? “Your house is in danger if your neighbor’s wall is on fire” (G-684). 226 Man by Nature
BURKE, Edmund
From the book World History in sayings and quotes author Dushenko Konstantin VasilievichBURKE, Edmund (Burke, Edmund, 1729–1797), English politician, publicist, philosopher43a* You cannot draw up an indictment against an entire people. Speech in Parliament on March 22, 1775 about concluding peace with the North American states? Shapiro, p. 115Exact quote: “I don’t know how to compose...”43bNot
BURKE
From the book Formula for Success. Leader's Handbook for Reaching the Top author Kondrashov Anatoly PavlovichBURKE Edmund Burke (1729–1797) - English publicist and philosopher.* * * Prudence is the mother of safety. Clear order is the basis of all success. Anyone who fights with us strengthens our character and improves our skills. Our enemy is ours
EDMUND BURKE
U.A. Dunning
At the age of fifty-nine, after a long and difficult political career in the Whig Party, Burke was faced in 1789 with the need to judge the revolutionary changes in France. Many Frenchmen, and many Englishmen who agreed with them, believed that the principles and purposes of the National Assembly in Paris were the same as those of the Parliament in London, which carried out the revolution a hundred years ago. For this reason, the Whigs, who boasted of being the main bearers of the doctrines and tradition of the "Glorious Revolution" of 1688, were quite naturally suspected of sympathizing with the new order in France. Burke, however, was alarmed by both the principles and practices of the French. He saw that their dogmas corresponded rather to the Levellers of 1649 than to the Whigs of 1688; and the ruthless destruction they undertook of ancient institutions, political, religious and economic, filled his aristocratic soul with terrible forebodings about democracy. England was gripped by anxiety and agitation sympathetic to French principles, and societies promoting these ideas were highly active. The contempt and hatred with which Burke viewed them led him to vigorously fight against them. First he made an accusatory speech in parliament, then he wrote his famous essays, in which he analyzed the history and philosophy of the revolution as a whole, as he understood them. The main work was "Reflections on the Revolution in France", printed in 1790, and the second most important work, from the point of view of political philosophy, the first was "The Conversion of the Old Whigs to the New", printed in 1791. Neither of them is systematic presentation of a unified political theory. Both consist in large part of vehement attacks on what Burke, often without any justification, believed to be the policies and results of the French Revolutionary Party. The brilliance of his eloquence somewhat obscures the consistency of his reasoning, yet the task of reconstructing the philosophy which underlies his sentiments is not very difficult. Burke's hostility towards the revolution is directed both against its character in general and against its specific content. As for the revolution as a whole, he rebelled with indignation against the desire to describe human rights and the social order with mathematical precision. Solid logic, he argues, does not play a decisive role in explaining political life. The pride of French philosophy in reducing the entire science of government to the brief formulas of a written constitution is, from Burke’s point of view, the greatest stupidity. The “Declaration of the Rights of Man” is a systematically laid out rules of anarchy, “a disregard for generally accepted rules worthy of disobedient schoolchildren.” It is to the extent that these dogmas are logically and metaphysically true that they are morally and politically false. Politics, Burke argues, is the cunning art of satisfying people's needs after society has outgrown its abstract rights. Achieving this goal requires precise calculation regarding the means, and the organization of these means is the constitution of the state, and abstract reasoning about the conditions of the pre-state state has no meaning. Why discuss, he asks, the abstract right of the patient to treatment? Call a doctor to help him, not a philosophy professor. Burke's intolerance for philosophizing is clearly demonstrated in his analysis of the social contract theory. Here he successfully avoids the need to be precise and internally consistent, which is usually difficult for him. Burke's works discuss both concepts, which we have designated as the contract theory [This refers to the points of view according to which 1) the emergence of a state occurs as a result of a contract between people and 2) in any state there is an unspoken agreement between subjects and the government on the conditions under which they are ready for peaceful relations with each other - Translation]. He discusses both the agreement that gives rise to society and the agreement between the monarch and his subjects. In both cases, he clearly opposes the conclusions that revolutionaries draw from the contract theory. The dangerous clarity with which Hobbes, Rousseau and their followers described the social contract has no charm in Burke's eyes. He takes the side of Bolingbroke and other English publicists and contrasts the blurred image of the social contract that they paint with his dazzling eloquence in its inconsistency:
“A state is, indeed, an agreement, but a state should not be considered as something that is no worse or better than an agreement between partners in the business of trading pepper or coffee... which is concluded for a short period and is terminated at the discretion of the parties. It is cooperation in all sciences, arts and virtues. Since the goals of such a partnership cannot be achieved even over many generations, it becomes a partnership not only of living people, but of the living, those who no longer live and those who have not yet been born. Every contract which creates a state is a contract of eternal union, binding together the lower and the higher nature, the visible and the invisible world, in accordance with the act of an inviolable oath, holding all physical and moral nature in its proper place.”
Burke may have felt confident that the revolution, after such an inspired speech of his, would not be able to make logic its weapon. In his “Address of the Old Whigs to the New,” Burke was obliged to deal with the doctrines of the revolutionary party. A whole crowd of witty critics responded to the Reflections (the wittiest was Thomas Paine in his Rights of Man) and forced him to be more precise in both attack and defense. Burke contrasted the dogmas of the revolutionary party with the foundations of his faith. The fact that sovereignty constantly and inalienably belongs to the people, that people can legally change the government of their own free will, that the arithmetic majority is the indisputable body of the people's will, that recognition of equal weight for any personal opinion is a requirement of political justice, that the people do not have a constitution until a certain a formal document will not be approved by popular vote - all these dogmas, which, according to Burke, constitute the essence of the philosophy of his opponents, Burke rejects with great energy. He contrasts them with the following view:
Political society and government can have their source in the consent and agreement of individuals. In this sense, the will of the people is the source of power, and the people can be called sovereign. But beyond this situation, it would be fundamentally wrong to regard the individual will, or any number of them, as the highest authority. A person is born into an already established society and from birth is obliged to respect its institutions. To assert that he can cast them aside at will is to affirm the principles of anarchy. Duty should be recognized as being higher than will. Debt exists regardless of formal agreement with it. Without this, society is impossible. The relationship between children and parents is not arbitrary - it is certain in the case of the child and very likely in the case of the parent, and the moral obligations arising from it are essential to social development. Thus, the political and social conditions into which a person is born are not the subject of his choice; on the contrary, he has responsibilities in relation to them.
“No man or number of men (except of necessity, which is above the law) can free himself from the original involvement in society with its contracts, since he is born into the world by his parents and is flesh of their flesh. Each person’s place in society determines his responsibilities.”
This ingenious and powerful attack on the tenets of popular sovereignty is reinforced by Burke with an equally vigorous rebuke against the idea that an arithmetical majority controls popular sovereignty. In short, his arguments are that when establishing a state, as the defenders of popular sovereignty show, unanimity is necessary, and after the state is established, the people cease to exist as a mass of units separate from each other, they are replaced by organization and relationships, established by a public union; therefore, neither before the establishment of the state, nor after that, there is no place for majority rule.
To the assumption that government by majority vote is prescribed by the terms of the contract, Burke contrasts his doctrine, according to which any state that follows nature is aristocratic
The fact that people who are differently gifted should act together, according to Burke, suggests that leadership should belong to the wiser and more experienced. This is the only way to achieve the goals for which the union is created. This is already characteristic of the state of nature, which precedes the establishment of government. "Natural aristocracy" is observed in every properly organized community. For a nation, this is that part of it that, due to its origin, wealth or intellect, has special abilities for public service - people of bright minds, outstanding people. To dissolve them in the mass and give them the power equal to one vote means to commit violence against nature and establish a reign of anarchy.
As for the theory of constitution, Burke has nothing to offer the reader except a laudatory description of the English constitution. In it he sees the correct, simple and naturally effective work of social and political forces. The organs of government - the king, parliament and the court - derive their authority from the law and custom of the country, which form the basic constitutional compact. Life, liberty and property are guaranteed not because abstract philosophy demands them, but because they are embodied in laws. The basis of policy is convenience, not abstract formulas. Freedom and power are properly regulated. “The whole scheme of our mixed government is aimed at preventing any of its principles from becoming theoretical.” The essence of the system is checks and balances. Each part fulfills its goals and controls the others. “The British Constitution is a constant practice of compact and compromise, sometimes overtly, sometimes subtly.” In this, as in contrast to the requirement that every principle act in the form of logical perfection, Burke sees the special merit and philosophical justification of the constitution. From the above it is clear that Burke is more of a statesman in spirit than a philosopher. His focus is on the current affairs of the state, rather than purely rational concepts. The experience of mankind and the institutions in which human nature finds expression are those from which political principles must be derived. In defending this idea, Burke contrasts himself with the thinkers who formed the historical school of political science. His praise of Montesquieu illustrates the type of his philosophy in that it is expressed in violent attacks against Rousseau. Burke, while denying metaphysical and a priori politics, does not himself avoid certain theoretical assumptions similar to those he rejects. He is not a straightforward empiricist. When he states that political philosophy should not go beyond the limits established by existing institutions in its investigation, when he declares the innovative spirit a threat, he speaks on behalf of the natural and divine order that determines human affairs. Behind existing political systems, according to Burke, there is a moral principle established by a higher mind and requiring a respectful attitude towards it. This mystical mood of thought is visible in various places, but it is not so clear that it can be defined. Among other representatives of anti-revolutionary theories, this attitude takes on the character of obvious obscurantism.
Edmund Burke's main theoretical work, "Reflections on the Revolution in France and what is happening in certain societies in England in connection with this event," was published for the first time in 1790, a year after the fall of the Bastille and the proclamation of the new constitution, but even before the abolition of the monarchy, the outbreak of war and unleashing terror. This work essentially began a fundamental political debate about the meaning and significance of the French Revolution and the principles it proclaimed, which continues to this day.
Edmund Burke acted as a convinced critic of the tendencies that emerged during the revolution, seeing in them seeds that promised over time to yield completely different shoots than those sowed were counting on.
bodies, dangerous, from his point of view, not only for French, but also for British society.
Burke's political theory is based on three principles: history, interpretation of society and continuity. Burke believed that humanity can realize itself only in history, and only through institutions that have stood the test of time. This is due to his very specific approach to a person. Recognizing the moral instability, viciousness and ignorance in human nature, he believed in the need for the disciplinary influence of an ordered society to release the best aspects of the human personality and limit the worst.
“Man is the most unwise and at the same time the wisest creature. The individual is stupid. The masses, at the moment when they act thoughtlessly, are stupid; but the race is wise and, when given time, as a race it almost always acts correctly” 1 .
Society, therefore, can only be a historical product, the result of slow, natural growth: an organic unity with its own character, in which there is a place for patriotism, and for morality, and for religion. It simultaneously dictates a code of conduct directed both against the excesses of individualism and against tyrants. For for Burke, unlimited individualism, as well as political tyranny, stem from one source - arbitrary behavior that destroys traditions and customs. Tradition - the collected history of customs, prejudices and wisdom - is the only reasonable means of achieving justice. Contrary to the ideas of the Enlightenment, polemicizing with them, Burke contrasted tradition with reason, elevating it above it. For for him, following tradition means acting in accordance with the age-old wisdom of the family, nature itself, embodied in tradition. Therefore, he also interpreted politics not as a consequence of deep reflection, but primarily as
“the happy consequence of following nature, which is wisdom without reflection and stands above reflection” 2.
For an ideological reformer who acts to achieve abstract justice as if human nature and existing society can be neglected, Burke finds no other feelings than contempt. He doesn't understand how a person can
1 Vshke E. The Works. 16 Volumes. London: Rivington Publishers. 1803-1827. Vol. 10. P. 96-97.
2 Burke E. Op. cit. Vol. 11. P. 307.
can lead to such a level of arrogance that one views one’s own country as a blank sheet of paper (tabula rasa) on which one can write whatever one likes. Only continuity, the legacy of the past, both individual and collective, remain stabilizing factors in society. For him, the idea of heritage predetermines the principle of conservation, preservation, as well as the principle of transmission, without excluding the principle of improvement. It is not surprising, therefore, that in the destruction of the “old order” in France, Burke saw the germs of robbery and anarchy, and in the proclamation of abstract human rights by political intellectuals - reflections of future bloodshed and tyranny. One of his phrases in this regard even became a catchphrase:
"In the groves their At the end of every alley of the Academy you can see the gallows” 3.
Later, it was Burke's traditionalism that predetermined his role in the conservative Pantheon.
The embodiment of tradition for Burke is, first of all, the English constitution, which has stood the test of time. In the stereotypical image of the post-Newtonian scientific era, the English constitution looked like a complex machine, including various systems of checks and balances, whose interaction created a constant balance of power. In this subtle, balanced structure, from Burke's point of view, lay the secret of the combination of freedom and order, which aroused the admiration of Montesquieu. The government was therefore viewed in a mechanistic way - honest and qualified politician-engineers were required who were supposed to ensure the smooth operation of the machine. Their main task was to maintain balance in the future. Like gardeners, they had to nurture the evergreen tree of the constitution, carefully removing dried shoots. In other words, the principle of evolution had to be combined with the principle of conservation.
The English (unwritten) and American (written) constitutions are examples of Burke's ideas about good government. As time passes, it becomes more and more difficult to change the fundamental principles contained in them, due to the presumption of existing institutions, for the weight of time and experience consistently restores again and again the wisdom inherent in them originally. Back in 1782, in one of his speeches, Burke said:
3 The Conservatives. A History from their Origin. Penguin: Harmondsworth, 1969. P. 11.
“... our constitution is a prescriptive constitution, whose only authority lies in the fact that it exists for a long time, independent of reason... It has another basis for authority in the structure of the human mind, in presumption. It is precisely the presumption in favor of any scheme of government over any untried project, the fact that a nation existed and prospered under it... A nation is not just a local idea and a momentary association of individuals, but an idea of continuity that extends over time, into mass and space. And this is not a random and frivolous choice of one day, but a deliberate selection of centuries and generations - this is the Constitution, created by something that is ten thousand times better than a choice...." 4
BURKE, Edmund (1729-1797) - founder of modern conservatism, English politician. For almost thirty years he was a member of the English Parliament. His political teaching emerged as a result of his study of the Great French Revolution of 1789, of which he was an ardent opponent.
This logic of reasoning, quite naturally, led Burke to a sharp condemnation of the French attempts to “make” the Constitution, since he considered this task impossible. Constitutions, from his point of view, take time to form, develop and grow - they cannot be drawn up overnight. Otherwise, their content and the existing political reality will coexist in different dimensions, and the written Constitution will inevitably turn into empty paper.
The concepts of constitution and state are central to Burke's political theory. He advocated strong, centralized government and therefore sharply criticized the federal administrative structure approved by the French National Assembly (later renamed the Constitutional Assembly) established by the 1789 revolution. From his point of view, the federal type of structure dismembers the nation and makes it impossible to govern it as a single “body”.
Society is an organism; it is ordered and hierarchical in nature. Burke understood society as more than a simple sum of individuals. According to Burke, the state and natural human rights are mutually exclusive concepts. Natural rights could exist only in a state of nature, when there was no state or society.
4 Burke E. Op. cit. Vol. 10. P. 96-97.
“In the state of brute nature there is no such thing as a people. A certain number of people in themselves do not have collectivist potential. The idea of the people is the idea of the corporation” 5.
People do not form civil society to protect their rights. Like Thomas Hobbes, Burke believed that individuals, when they join together in civil society, give up their rights. The organicist analogy used by Burke in relation to state and society also underlies the reasoning of the theorists of neoconservatism. Thus, Roger Scruton (whose work we will get acquainted with in the next paragraph) repeats it, arguing that “the state is not a machine, but an organism, moreover, a person...” 6. According to many modern researchers of conservatism, organicism is one of the most important features implicit in conservatism as an ideological and political movement.
Like other political thinkers of his time, Burke viewed society as a kind of aggregate, based on an original “social contract.”
“Society is indeed a contract.... It must be viewed with one reservation, for it is not a partnership in things subordinate only to animal existence. It is a partnership in all sciences, a partnership in all arts, a partnership in all virtues, a partnership in all perfections. Since the goals of such a partnership cannot be achieved over many generations, it becomes a partnership not only among those who live, but also between those who have lived, died and who are yet to be born. Every treaty of every particular State is but the articles of the great primordial compact of an eternal society, binding the higher and lower nature, the visible and the invisible world, in accordance with a fixed compact, sanctioned by an inviolable oath, which holds all physical and moral nature to its appointed place.
Burke seemed generally willing to accept that the French revolutionaries would be able to succeed in establishing a government and even in securing a degree of freedom for their citizens, but he insisted that their methods rendered them incapable of guaranteeing the elusive necessity of a civil society - free rule.
5 Burke E. Reflections.... P. 142.
6 Scruton R. The Meaning of Conservatism. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1980. P. 50.
7 Burke E. Reflections. P. 194-195.
“Creating a government does not require great caution. Establish the seat of authority, teach obedience, and the job is done. Giving freedom is even easier. There is no need to show the way, you just need to loosen the reins. But to form free government, those. to reconcile the opposing elements of freedom and constraint in working together requires much thought, deep understanding, foresight, a strong and united mind. Those who head the National Assembly do not have this” 8 .
Thus, freedom for Burke is a product of social order and social discipline; moreover, freedom and limitation are inseparable. A greater degree of freedom is necessary for the full development of the human spirit, but it must be the freedom that flows naturally from a well-ordered society. No governmental decrees or doctrinal precepts can satisfactorily delineate the limits of human activity or the progress of civilization. Human nature is complex, society is even more complex, and therefore no simple disposition of power, its directives or directing activities corresponds to human nature.
Although Burke rejected natural law, he nevertheless believed that modern people, born into civil society, already have certain inherited rights.
“People have the right to live under... the rule (of laws - L.T.); they have a right to justice.... They have a right to the products of industry and to the means that make production useful. They have the right to the acquisitions of their parents, to food and maintenance of their offspring. ...What each person can do individually, without relying on others, he has the right to do for himself; and he has a right to a fair share of what the whole of society, with all its combinations of skills and powers, can do for him. In this partnership, all people have equal rights, but not an equal share. He who has five shillings in this partnership has the same rights to it as he who has the larger share of five hundred pounds. But he does not have the right to equal dividends from total production” 9.
Likewise, not everyone has equal rights to exercise power.
Thus, Burke the bourgeois completely coincides with Burke the conservative. By the time his political career began, English society was already a capitalist society. Therefore, what Burke understood by a traditional, healthy society is how
8 Ibid. P. 373-374.
9 Burke E. Op. cit. P. 149-150.
times the dominance of capitalist relations. Burke's example clearly shows that individualistic liberalism is easily combined with conservatism, since the latter accepts as indisputable the existence of a capitalist market as the basis of a healthy society.
When Burke claims to love “manly, moral, regulated liberty” as much as any supporter of the French Revolution, he means it. But where his ideas fundamentally differ from the ideas of the French revolutionaries is that human rights cannot and should not follow from abstract reasoning. Here he again comes into conflict with the Enlightenment postulate that reason will free man. In his opinion, human rights can only be ensured in the protected environment of a well-organized civil society. Government is as important as freedom, for without stable government, true freedom cannot exist.
“But I cannot take the position of praising and blaming something that is connected with human activity and human interests, agree with a simple view of the object when it is freed from all relations, in all the nakedness and solitude of metaphysical abstraction. Conditions (which mean nothing to some gentlemen) give in effect to every political principle a distinct color and effect of isolation. Conditions are what make any civil or political scheme either profitable or
disastrous for humanity__
I will, therefore, refrain from congratulating the new freedom in France until I know how it relates to government, to public strength, to the discipline and obedience of the army, to the efficient collection and good distribution of revenue, to morality and religion, to security of property, peace and order, civil and social morals. All these (in their own way) are also good things, but without them freedom is a blessing as long as it lasts, and it is unlikely to last long.”10
Burke also paid attention to the problem of the best, from his point of view, form of government. The French model obviously caused him great doubt. At the time of writing “Reflections on the Revolution in France”... there was a process of destruction of the absolute monarchy and the creation of a new, democratic system of government. Burke was very critical of what was happening, but his position should not be considered unequivocally negative. Being a staunch supporter
> Burke E. Op. cit. P. 89-90.
a constitutional monarchy of the British type, in which the sovereign, lords, parliament, church and commons occupied definite and countervailing positions according to law, he considered the view that all power should come from the people subversive. At the same time, Burke was also an opponent of the views of the “old fanatics of a single arbitrary power”, who insisted that only an absolute monarchy established from above could be the only legitimate form of power. But in this case, Burke again put forward certain conditions. A constitutional monarchy is a desirable form of government, but it leaves room for monarchs to usurp power. In this case, the monarch should be removed, as the British did in 1688.
As for France, Burke did not at all classify Louis XVI and Queen Marie Antoinette as “ruthless and cruel tyrants,” otherwise he would not have had any objections to the need "punishment of actual tyrants as a noble and terrible act of justice." However, while viewing the French monarchy as not without flaws, he did not consider it so despotic as to legitimize its artificial destruction - it could and should only be reformed. He accused the French revolutionaries of exaggerating the crimes of the monarchy and its mistakes as a means of legitimizing a revolution that had no other basis than the speculative theories of malicious thinkers.
Burke believed that good government must include three elements: monarchy, aristocracy and the people. Although the people played a central role in Burke's concept, he understood them as a rather narrow group of people. In one case, he gave a rough figure of 400 thousand people, which included property owners in England and Scotland, mainly landowners, wealthy merchants, industrialists, and wealthy yeomen. But the people are not capable of self-government - they must serve only as a counterweight to royal power. The core of good government consists of “natural aristocracies” - peers, nobles, the richest and most successful merchants, educated people (lawyers, scientists, even artists) who, by their birth, traditions and habits, know how to govern wisely for the benefit of all others. Today we would call them the elite of society. Taking into account economic status and social conditions,
“The “natural aristocracy” must serve as a bulwark of freedom in relation to the pressure of monarchical despotism and popular tyranny (tyranny of the majority). The fatal mistake of the French nobility, which
11 Burke E. Op. cit. P. 178.
which ultimately led to the revolution, Burke considered the fact that people from the bourgeoisie, who had reached the level of aristocracy in their wealth, did not receive the social position and dignity that wealth, for reasons of reason and politics, deserves in any country... true.. ., not at all equal to the nobility" 12.
In this regard, Burke also gave his interpretation of parliamentary government as a necessary additional element to the activities of the monarchy, aristocracy and people. The duty of a member of parliament, Burke believed, was to care for the good of society as a whole. This idea was made very clear in one of his speeches addressed to voters in Bristol, whom he at one time represented in the House of Commons.
“Your representative is indebted to you not only in terms of his activities, but also in terms of his judgments; and he betrays you instead
in order to serve you if he sacrifices it for the sake of your opinion__
If government were a matter of will on either side, yours would no doubt be more important. But government and legislation are a matter of reason and judgment, and not of inclinations.... Parliament is not a congress representatives of different and hostile interests, each of whom must defend those interests as agent and lawyer against other agents and lawyers; but parliament is an advisory body one nation with one interest as a whole; ... You actually elect a member (of parliament - A.T.), but when you elected him, he was no longer a member of the community of Bristol, but a member parliament" 13 .
Since members of parliament are not delegates with mandates from seats representing specific interest groups, they must think first of the general interest - but then there is no need for all individuals or groups to vote. Burke called this idea "apparent representation."
Although universal representation was possible in a homogeneous society, Burke believed that it had practical limitations. Under theories of “apparent representation”, the issue of voting becomes irrelevant because in theory all groups, whether they vote or not, are represented by all members of parliament. Apparently, this approach was dictated by the very real electoral situation in Burke’s time - back in 1831, that is, six decades after the publication of Reflections on the Revolution in France.
12 Burke E. The Works. Vol. 11. P. 409.
13 Ibid. Vol. 3. P. 19-20.
tion...", only 5 percent of the country's population over 20 years of age took part in the elections 14.
This, apparently, stems from Burke's sharp criticism of the form of organization that he calls “the extremist form of democracy.” Although he did not fully share the opinion of his contemporary John Wesley that
“The greater the share of the people in the government, the less freedom, civil and religious, does the nation enjoy,” Burke warned against “the vulgar part of the community” becoming “the depositaries of all power” 15.
Burke was a proponent of partial democracy, in which the power of the people would be checked by other, constitutionally defined institutions - the monarch, the lords and the church. According to Burke, the French revolutionaries created a false panacea - "extremist democracy" - because they never understood the true nature and source of all tyranny.
“As if these gentlemen had never heard... of something in common between the despotism of a monarch and the despotism of the masses.... Have they never heard of a monarchy directed by law, controlled and balanced by the hereditary wealth and hereditary greatness of the nation in its turn controlled by the reason and feelings of the people, largely acting as a corresponding and permanent body? Is it not, in this case, impossible that a man can be found who, without malice or pitiful absurdity, will not prefer such a mixed and moderate government to one of the extremes, and will not consider a nation destitute of all wisdom and all virtues, if it, having the opportunity easy choice of such a government, but rather supporting it, since she already owns it, would prefer to commit a thousand crimes and doom her country to a thousand troubles in order to avoid this? Is the generally accepted idea true that pure democracy is the only form into which human society can be thrown, that a person is not allowed to hesitate regarding its properties without the suspicion that he is a friend of tyranny, that is, an enemy of humanity? 16
14 Political Thinkers/Ed. by D.Mushamp. Basingstoke: Macmillan Education, 1986. P. 139.
15 Quoted. by: Plumb J.H. England in the Eighteenth Century. Harmonsworth: Penguin, 1950. P. 94.
16 Burke E. Reflections.... P. 227-228.
"Pure democracy" for Burke is "the most unscrupulous thing" in the world. In fact, he criticized majority democracy.
“One thing I am sure of is that in a democracy, the majority of citizens are capable of carrying out the most brutal suppression of a minority, and when brutal division prevails in politics of this type, the suppression of the minority will greatly expand and will be carried out with much greater malice than could ever be imagined under power one scepter. Under such popular persecution the individual sufferers will be in a much more deplorable position than under any other. Under the cruel prince, they have at their disposal the healing compassion of humanity, soothing the pain of their wounds, the approval of people, inspiring them to persevere in times of suffering; but those who are accused of evil by the masses are deprived of all external consolation. They seem to be rejected by humanity, crushed by the conspiracy of their entire kind... " 17.
Yet Burke admits that, under certain circumstances, a purely democratic form of government may be both necessary and desirable. He explained it quite simply: “I do not condemn any form of government purely on abstract principles.” 19 . However, for him, “pure democracy” is always inferior to a mixed and equilibrium system of government. The most important - legitimacy government capable of maintaining civil order. If, under certain conditions, democracy is the only system capable of ensuring this order, Burke is entirely in favor of such democracy.
The French Revolution was an unnatural event for Burke, not only because it proclaimed the erasure of differences between classes and put forward the slogan “liberty, equality, fraternity,” but, mainly, due to the fact that it deliberately and consciously destroyed “all the opinions and prejudices that supported the government,” that is, its legitimacy™. He made a “prophetic” prediction that, having destroyed the source of authority of government power, the new rulers of France would soon be forced to increasingly resort to naked violence in order to force the people to carry out government decisions, although we are already talking about a new government. This, Burke predicted, would lead to the transformation of the army into a deliberative institution, thereby contributing to the slide of the state into the worst form of tyranny - military democracy. And although the actual
17 Ibid. P. 229.
19 Burke E. Op. cit. P. 344.
The reason for the transition to terror was, first of all, the need to suppress the resistance of the old feudal, anti-revolutionary classes; the very fact of rampant violence in France and the later rise of Napoleon created Burke’s reputation as a “prophet.”
In “Reflections on the Revolution in France...” Burke singled out religion as one of the main arguments against the illegality of revolutionary changes. Ian Gilmour, one of the leading theoreticians of the modern Conservative Party in Great Britain, even called Burke "the most religiously consistent of British political writers" 10 . However, it would be wrong to assume that Burke derived his political principles solely from theological perceptions. He appears to have believed in the concept of "original sin" and therefore rejected the Enlightenment thesis of human perfection. However, Burke was by no means a fanatic - he advocated religious tolerance, which was extremely unpopular in the political circles of his time. Perhaps this was explained by his mixed origin: his father was a Protestant, his mother a Catholic. His faith was rational, he rejected religious superstitions as the religion of “weak minds.”
From his point of view, the role of religion in the political process is exceptionally great. He believed that the state, as part of the eternal order, received religious illumination so that it would be discouraged to begin a drastic breakdown of old institutions. In contrast to Locke, who believed that the state and the church are different in nature and purposes, Burke argued for their unity 21 . Thus, he advocated the civil establishment of religion. It is quite understandable that with such convictions Burke could not help but criticize the policy of the French National Assembly directed against the church, the Catholic clergy and, in particular, the confiscation of church property. The revolutionaries, motivated by faith in Reason, apparently sought to eradicate Christianity, from his point of view making an irreparable mistake.
Organized religion, Burke believed, was the most important force maintaining civil order and confirming the legitimacy of government. The destruction of the church also leads to tyranny, for at the same time traditional morality, which restrains base passions and maintains order, is also destroyed. His ideal is the Anglican system of church structure.
“The sanctification of the state by state religious institution is also necessary in order to act with complete reverence towards free citizens, since in order to
20 Gilmour J. Inside Right: A Study of Conservatism. London, 1978. P. 61.
21 Burke E. Reflections.... P. 269.
to ensure their freedom, they must have a certain amount of power. For them, then, religion, connected with the state and with duty towards it, becomes even more necessary than in such societies where people are limited in their dependence by personal feelings and the rule of their own family interests. All men who have any share of power should be greatly impressed with the idea that they act in trust, and that they receive the credit for their conduct through their confidence in the one great Master, the Author and Creator of society." 22
Burke also remains within the framework of traditionalism in his approach to the problems of change, renewal and reform. Being an implacable opponent of the French Revolution, he does not oppose political transformation. This is clear from his statement that “the state is without the means to make some changes- does not have the means to preserve itself" 1 *. “My leading principle in the reformation of the state- use available materials... Your architects,- he wrote to a member of the French National Assembly, - build without a foundation" 14 .
Preservation of the state is a priority. The French Revolution, which led to the destruction of civil order, is therefore extremely dangerous, because out of chaos despotism will be born faster than under the “old regime.” Burke reproached the French revolutionaries for wanting to destroy the “old order” just because it was the old order. On the contrary, it is the age of the institution that is the basis for its preservation, for the very reality of its existence proves its usefulness. This is the British Constitution, which does not follow every political fashion. This is the Anglican Church, which had changed little from the 14th-15th centuries to the time of Burke.
Burke, of course, saw that the civil order was by no means perfect and in many ways unjust. But this does not mean that he must be overthrown. Burke again and again attacks the French revolutionaries for their deeply mistaken belief that evil can be eradicated by destroying its outward manifestations.
“You will not cure evil by deciding that there should be no more monarchs, no more ministers of state, no more preachers, no interpreters of laws, no more officers, no more public councils. You can change the names. Things, in a sense, must remain. A certain amount of power must be in society, in someone's hands and under some name. Wise people use their medicines against vices, and
22 Ibid. R. 190.
23 Burke E. Op. cit. P. 106.
24 Burke E. The Works. Vol. 17. P. 553.
not their names, to the causes of evil, which are constant, and not to the random organs through which it acts, and the changing types in which it manifests itself. Otherwise you will be wise in the historical sense, but foolish in practice. Rarely do two centuries have the same fashion for prepositions and the same types of troubles. Malice is a little more creative. While you are discussing the form, it disappears. The same vices take on new flesh. The spirit moves and, far from losing its vital principle in the change of appearance, it is renewed in its new organs with fresh energy and youthful activity. They overstep their boundaries, they continue their devastation; while you hang their corpses and destroy their graves. You frighten yourself with ghosts and visions while your home has become a den of robbers. And so it is with all who, touching only the shell and husk of history, believe that they are waging war with intolerance, arrogance and cruelty, while waving the banner of hatred against the bad principles of outdated parties, they legitimize and nourish the same odious vices in other groups, and sometimes in dshi x" 25.
But how should political medicines be correctly applied, from Burke's position? Extremely slowly and carefully. For blindly following precedent will be as foolish a practice for humanity as denying the past. Change, slow and gradual, is also part of history, part of political life. Time itself is the great renewer. Respect for the continuity of the social fabric must be combined with gradual evolution through adaptation rather than destruction.
“My standard of statesman,” wrote Burke, “should be a disposition to preserve and a capacity for improvement combined.” 26
Man is by nature imperfect. Such, therefore, are its social and political organizations. The weaknesses of established political institutions are obvious. Irresponsible criticism of metaphysicians unfortunately easily destabilizes them.
“In order, therefore, to avoid the evil of instability and variability, which is ten thousand times worse than obstinacy and the blindest prejudices, we consecrate the state so that no one can approach and look into its weaknesses and corruption except with the necessary precautions so that he never starts dreaming about
25 Burke E. Reflections.... P. 248-249.
26 Burke E. The Works. Vol. 11. P. 427-^28.
he sought reform through overthrow, so that he would approach the weaknesses of the state, as the wounds of his father, with pious and reverent care. With this important premise, we were taught to look with horror at those children of their country who seek to quickly cut an old parent into pieces, throw them into a witchcraft cauldron in the hope that from poisonous weeds and wild spells they will restore the body of the father and breathe life into it. 27.
Since “anger and madness will destroy more in half an hour than prudence and foresight can build in a hundred years,” there is no more important task than “simultaneously preserving and reforming.” Changes, Burke argued, should occur when and because circumstances require them (later conservatives would say - when they mature in the depths of society), and not in response to the utopian projects of political “sorcerers”, extremely far from the reality of political life and untrained government activities.
Burke does not provide recipes for reform suitable for new generations of conservatives. His interest in Reflections on the Revolution in France was limited to contrasting the ideological bastion with the squall of the French Revolution, which threatened to spread to the British island, and not to developing an abstract theory of revolution and political change. Nevertheless, it is with the name of Burke that the first powerful theoretical attack in England against the political philosophy of the Enlightenment is associated; he also became, in essence, the founder of the political theory of conservatism. And despite some inconsistency, logical errors and amorphism in the development of a number of topics, Burke occupied an important place in the history of political ideas. It is obvious that without him the ideological landscape of modern conservatism would hardly have become understandable. That is why we turned to the history of political thought of the 18th century, to the works of Edmund Burke, before we begin to consider the kaleidoscope of conservative movements of the 20th century.
