The various historical happenings of the eighteenth century were just as influenced by the rhetoric of Edmund Burke and Thomas Paine as Burke and Paine were influenced by the phenomena that was taking place at the time. Thomas Paine was a radical liberalist that believed in revolution against the monarchy as much as he called for a complete overhaul of society; Edmund Burke, on the other hand, was a much more conservative politician: Burke believed that revolution came gradually and incrementally and that a revolution as sudden and violent as the French Revolution went against the natural order and would inevitably fail. Despite differences in beliefs between the two, their roles in the taking place of these phenomena are undeniably crucial: …show more content…
Though Paine’s reaction towards the British monarchy is definitely an extreme one given that the majority belief was reconciliation with the crown of the British Isles, Burke’s reaction would be just as extreme on the other side of the political spectrum (the extremist belief would even manifest itself in hostile words towards the French). However, both political beliefs have them fit neatly into the notion of historical progress, for they both advocate for the same thing: governmental change. Burke argues that political change is best done gradually and makes that argument with at least a century of “evolutionary politics” as evidence, while Paine appeals to the common citizen while using rhetoric and emotion to found his argument. While Burke and Paine might have had conflicting views, their contributions to revolutions and political processes positively changed the diplomatic world with lasting …show more content…
Though his later opinions are what defined Burke mostly as an “extreme reactionary”, evidence that he supports a more conservative change in politics can be found in his advocation for “judicious treatment of the American and Irish colonies in earlier years”; colonies that had adopted legislative assemblies (in Ireland’s case, there was an Irish Parliament, though it was largely influenced by English politicians) out of necessity (174). Burke argues for an increased “likelihood of a descent into chaos if established political arrangements are overthrown” and largely wrote Reflections to address those in Britian who wanted to “introduce the principles of the French Revolution into their own country” (174). Enlightenment ideals of truth and reason are perhaps the most effective weapons for Burke as he argues the Glorious Revolution “an evolutionary development”, despite the fact that development of the British Constitution had been “punctuated by [violence] and [revolution]”
“Leslie Stephen described it (the eighteenth century) as ‘the century of cold common sense and growing toleration and of steady social and industrial improvement.’” Before the Enlightenment, the belief of the Divine Right of Kings was central to every nation. Kings were believed to be chosen by God and answerable to the divine alone, citizens could not question their King because in theory they would be questioning God. During the eighteenth century there was a shift in the public opinion of nobles and lords. Philosophes, or critics, began to openly object the way the government ran the people, even poking fun at the choices made. Kings were no longer feared. As people turned away from the restraints of government, a rise in individualism formed. ...
Revolutionary-era America produced many amazing things such as the swivel chair and the flatboat. But none is greater than Thomas Paine’s The Crisis and Patrick Henry’s speech. These Revolutionary writers are well known for their handiwork and their contribution to the American revolution. Their use of allusions and charged words caused patriotism to swell within the colonies, which in turn, gave rise to the revolt against British tyranny.
In a time full of chaos, desperation, and dissenting opinions, two definitive authors, Thomas Paine and Patrick Henry, led the way toward the American Revolution. Both men demanded action of their separate audiences. Paine wrote to inspire the commoners to fight while Henry spoke extemporaneously to compel the states’ delegates to create an army. Despite the differences between the two, both had very similar arguments which relied heavily upon God, abstract language, and ethos. In the end, both men were able to inspire their audiences and capture the approval and support of the masses. If not for these two highly influential and demanding men, the America that we know today might not exist.
Paine was no fool. He had an innate sense for politics and people in general. His sophisticated writing and carefully planned rhetoric repeatedly swayed the masses in works such as Common Sense and The Rights of Man. The publication of The Crisis came at a time when the odds were heavily agai...
Edmund Burke was an Irish political theorist and a philosopher who became a leading figure within the conservative party. Burke has now been perceived as the founder of modern conservatism. He was asked upon to write a piece of literature on the French Revolution. It was assumed that as an Englishman, Burke’s words would be positive and supportive. Given that he was a member of the Whig party, and that he supported the Glorious Revolution in England. Contrary to what was presumed of him, Burke was very critical of the French Revolution. He frequently stated that a fast change in society is bad. He believed that if any change to society should occur, it should be very slow and gradual.
“Is there a single trait of resemblance between those few towns and a great and growing people spread over a vast quarter of the globe, separated by a mighty ocean?” This question posed by Edmund Burke was in the hearts of nearly every colonist before the colonies gained their independence from Britain. The colonists’ heritage was largely British, as was their outlook on a great array of subjects; however, the position and prejudices they held concerning their independence were comprised entirely from American ingenuity. This identity crisis of these “British Americans” played an enormous role in the colonists’ battle for independence, and paved the road to revolution.
According to Carl N. Degler, the entire Revolution should be viewed as a conservative change. In “A New Kind of Revolution,” Degler talked about how the new actions taken place by the English had help structure and shape the colonial government. Not only did the colonies lack the affection of their motherland, Britain, they were also taxed unfairly. On the other hand, “The Radicalism of the American Revolution,” by Gordon S. Wood talks about how the American Revolution was a radical movement. His thesis covered how the country was transitioning from monarchy to republic, and now, democracy. The framers wanted to create a free nation where no single person rule. As well as, the people of the nation having the ultimate say so.
Paine had not entertained the idea of independence from Britain when he arrived in America. He thought it was “a kind of treason” to break away from Britain. It was not until the Battle of Lexington in 1775 that he considered “the compact between Britain and America to be broken” (Claeys). This idea of a broken compact allowed Thomas Paine to write a political pamphlet.
During 1776, the United States was at war to gain its own independence from the hands of the tyrant King George III and his kingdom. As the fightt continued, the spirits of the U.S. soldiers began to die out as the nightmares of winter crawled across the land. Thomas Paine, a journalist, hoped to encourage the soldiers back into the fight through one of his sixteen pamphlets, “The American Crisis (No.1)”. In order to rebuild the hopes of the downhearted soldiers, Thomas Paine establishes himself as a reliable figure, enrages them with the crimes of the British crown, and, most importantly evokes a sense of culpability.
Six months before the Declaration of Independence is written in 1776, Thomas Paine’s Common Sense is published, causing a substantial amount of colonists to rebel against the British once and for all. This radical document doesn’t just sell 120,000 in a few months, it changes colonists’ thoughts and outlook regarding the British monarchy, and ultimately pushes the colonies towards independence from Great Britain. His pamphlet starts with a more hypothetical approach about government and religion, then transforms into the detailed problems between Britain and its colonies.
An influential literary movement in the nineteenth century, transcendentalism placed an emphasis on the wonder of nature and its deep connection to the divine. As the two most prominent figures in the transcendentalist movement, Ralph Waldo Emerson and Henry David Thoreau whole-heartedly embraced these principles. In their essays “Self-Reliance” and “Civil Disobedience”, Emerson and Thoreau, respectively, argue for individuality and personal expression in different manners. In “Self-Reliance”, Emerson calls for individuals to speak their minds and resist societal conformity, while in “Civil Disobedience” Thoreau urged Americans to publicly state their opinions in order to improve their own government.
On a personal level, Burke’s assertions appear to support efforts for self-preservation because of his status in the social and political spheres of London. Because he was a Statesman, it was evidently easier for Edmund Burke to advocate slow changes for equality in France because he was already enjoying power in the British House of Commons (par. 32. The nlnlnlnlnlnlnlnlnlnlnlnlnlnln For that reason, Thomas Paine’s calls for democracy and liberty for the people of France are more appealing. Naturally, if the French needed time to elevate the social and political status of the commoners, then the Revolution would not have been necessary.
The turmoil of the 1600's and the desire for more fair forms of government combined to set the stage for new ideas about sovereignty. Locke wrote many influential political pieces, such as The Second Treatise of Government, which included the proposal for a legislative branch of government that would be selected by the people. Rousseau supported a direct form of democracy in which the people control the sovereignty. (how would the people control the sovereignty??) Sovereignty is the supremacy or authority of rule. Locke and Rousseau both bring up valid points about how a government should be divided and how sovereignty should be addressed.
The Glorious revolution was a changing point in the course of history. It was the first revolution of its kind which led to many more like the American revolution. There were many similarities between the Glorious and American revolution, John Locke played a key role in both revolutions, and Locke’s ideas were mirrored in the Declaration of Independence.
The most compelling argument for Burke against Locke is his idea that “government is not made in virtue of natural rights, which may and do exist in total independence of it… but their abstract perfection is their practical defect.” (Burke 564). Burke looks at the rights laid out by Locke and Rousseau and scoffs at them, stating that they have no merit in the real world, attractive as they are in principle. He believes that the pretended rights of these theorists are all extremes, and are therefore morally and politically false. Burke believes that “the rights of men are in a sort of middle,” (Burke 565), and their incapability of definition completely contradicts the extreme rights as defined by Locke.