A Vindication of Natural Society
Template:Short description Template:Use Oxford spelling Template:Use dmy dates Script error: No such module "Infobox".Template:Template otherScript error: No such module "Check for unknown parameters".Template:Wikidata image Template:Conservatism UK A Vindication of Natural Society: or, a View of the Miseries and Evils arising to Mankind from every Species of Artificial Society is a work by the Anglo-Irish politician Edmund Burke, published in 1756. Although the Vindication is a satire aimed at the deism of Lord Bolingbroke, Burke confronted Bolingbroke not in the sphere of religion but in that of civil society and government, countering that his arguments against revealed religion could apply to all institutions. So close to Bolingbroke's style was the work that Burke's ironic intention was missed by some readers, leading Burke in his preface to the second edition (1757) to make plain that it was a satire; this is the consensus view among most Burkean scholars and followers.
The Vindication was recognized as satire by William Godwin, often regarded as the first modern proponent of philosophical anarchism, who supported part of Burke's arguments critical of the existing political institutions despite the irony inherent in its satire. Conversely, some modern right-wing libertarian commentators, such as Murray Rothbard and Joseph Sobran, interpreted Burke's satire as a serious philosophical anarchist argument against the state.
<templatestyles src="Template:TOC limit/styles.css" />
Satire
Most historians and Burke's biographers, scholars, and followers believe the Vindication was intended as satire; some political commentators disagree.Template:Sfnm For example, American anarcho-capitalist economist and political theorist Murray Rothbard described the work as "perhaps the first modern expression of rationalistic and individualistic anarchism",Template:Sfnm and argued that Burke wrote the Vindication in earnest but later wished to disavow it for political reasons,Template:SfnmTemplate:Refn while American paleoconservative writer Joseph Sobran stated that Burke's anti-statist argument was too persuasive to be a joke.Template:Sfn
Rothbard's argument was based on a misunderstanding. He believed it took nine years (until 1765) for Burke to divulge that he was the author of the work, and only claimed it to be a satire to save his then spawning political career. In reality, Burke revealed both his authorship and claims the book as a satire in the preface to its second edition published in 1757, long before he would embark upon a political career.Template:Sfnm
British political philosopher William Godwin, often considered the first modern proponent of anarchism,Template:Refn appreciated its critique of political institutions but recognized the satire, and observed that the intent of Burke was to show that the existing political institutions, for all their flaws, were still preferable to anarchy.Template:Sfn Passages that included Jonathan Swift-style irony, where Burke acted as though he was Bolingbroke and those who supported him in many ways in the Vindication,Template:Sfn and as a theoretical realization of the danger such controversial opinions may have upon a career are the following:
<templatestyles src="Template:Blockquote/styles.css" />
"In such a Discussion, far am I from proposing in the least to reflect on our most wise Form of Government; no more than I would in the freer Parts of my philosophical Writings, mean to object to the Piety, Truth, and Perfection of our most excellent Church.Template:Sfn [...] These and many more Points I am far from spreading to their full Extent. You are sensible that I do not put forth half my Strength; and you cannot be at a loss for the Eeason. A Man is allowed sufficient Freedom of Thought, provided he knows how to chuse his Subject properly. You may criticise freely upon the Chinese Constitution, and observe with as much Severity as you please upon the Absurd Tricks, or destructive Bigotry of the Bonzees. But the Scene is changed as you come homeward, and Atheism or Treason may be the Names given in Britain, to what would be Reason and Truth if asserted of China."Template:Sfn
Script error: No such module "Check for unknown parameters".
Content
The preface presents the occasion of the essay as a riposte to the philosophy of Henry St John, 1st Viscount Bolingbroke (died 1751), whose Collected Works and Letters had been published by David Mallet in 5 volumes in 1754. A new preface was written by Burke after his authorship was discovered, and after a significant number of his contemporaries who read his work had not caught the irony.Template:Sfn In this apologetic preface, he wrote that Vindication was inspired by "seeing every Mode of Religion attacked in a lively Manner, and the Foundation of every Virtue, and of all Government, sapped with great Art and much Ingenuity" in Lord Bolingbroke's collected works.Template:Sfn About his design, Burke wrote:[1]
<templatestyles src="Template:Blockquote/styles.css" />
"The Design was, to shew that, without the Exertion of any considerable Forces, the same Engines which were employed for the Destruction of Religion, might be employed with equal Success for the Subversion of Government; and that specious Arguments might be used against those Things which they, who doubt of every thing else, will never permit to be questioned."Template:Sfnm
Script error: No such module "Check for unknown parameters".
Burke contrasts natural society with political society,Template:Sfnm beginning with a distrust of the Mind, which "every day invents some new artificial Rule to guide that Nature which if left to itself were the best and surest Guide".Template:Sfn He proposes to set out to identify those "unalterable Relations which Providence has ordained that every thing should bear to every other. These Relations, which are Truth itself, the Foundation of Virtue, and consequently, the only Measures of Happiness, should be likewise the only Measures by which we should direct our Reasoning."Template:Sfn Burke's attack on the rationalists of his day is not because they are rationalists but because they engage in artificial rather than natural reason.Template:Sfn In the spirit of the Age of Enlightenment, Burke expresses every confidence in the cumulative progress of the human condition. He writes:
<templatestyles src="Template:Blockquote/styles.css" />
"The Fabrick of Superstition has in this our Age and Nation received much ruder Shocks than it had ever felt before; and through the Chinks and Breaches of our Prison, we see such Glimmerings of Light, and feel such refreshing Airs of Liberty, as daily raise our Ardor for more. The Miseries derived to Mankind from Superstition, under the Name of Religion, and of ecclesiastical Tyranny under the Name of Church Government, have been clearly and usefully exposed."Template:Sfn
Script error: No such module "Check for unknown parameters".
In a swift survey of history, Burke finds nothing but "Tumults, Rebellions, Massacres, Assassinations, Proscriptions, and a Series of Horror",Template:Sfn and remarks that "All Empires have been cemented in Blood" as the casualties mount in the millions, with cruelties perfected by technology.[2] Contrasted with natural liberty and natural religion, Burke sets the Aristotelian general forms of government,[3] which he describes with the same emphatic detail as used in the Satires of Juvenal: starting from despotism, the simplest and most universal, where "unbounded Power proceeds Step by Step, until it has eradicated every laudable Principle";Template:Sfn then republics, which "have many Things in the Spirit of absolute Monarchy, but none more than this; a shining Merit is ever hated or suspected in a popular Assembly, as well as in a Court";Template:Sfn followed by aristocracy, which is scarcely better, as "a Genoese, or a Venetian Republick, is a concealed Despotism";Template:Sfn and finally giddy democracy, where the common people are "intoxicated with the Flatteries of their Orators".Template:SfnTemplate:Refn Despite being a law student, Burke also denounced lawyers and legal procedures.[4]
Having employed fulminating rhetoric to dispense with the artificial political societies after "so fair an Examen, wherein nothing has been exaggerated; no Fact produced which cannot be proved",Template:Sfn Burke is expected to turn to his idea of natural society for contrast. Instead, he turns his critical eye upon the mixed government, which combines monarchy, aristocracy, and a tempered democracy, the form of politics this essay's British readers would immediately identify as their own (Westminster system). His satirist's view takes it all in, painting once again in broad strokes the dilemmas of the law courts or the dissatisfactions of wealth, and closes—without actually having vindicated natural society at all. Embedded in the whirl of extravagant invective, Burke is able, like all writers of Menippean satire, to express some subversive criticism thusly: "You may criticise freely upon the Chinese Constitution, and observe with as much Severity as you please upon the Absurd Tricks, or destructive Bigotry of the Bonzees. But the Scene is changed as you come homeward, and Atheism or Treason may be the Names given in Britain, to what would be Reason and Truth if asserted of China."Template:Sfn
See also
Notes
<templatestyles src="Reflist/styles.css" />
Script error: No such module "Check for unknown parameters".
References
<templatestyles src="Reflist/styles.css" />
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Footnotes"., p. 437, citing Edmund Burke, Works, I, pp. 4–5: "... without the exertion of any considerable forces, the same engines which were employed with equal success for the subversion of government; and that specious arguments might be used against these things which they, who doubt of everything else, will never permit to be questioned."
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Footnotes"., p. 21. Also cited in Script error: No such module "Footnotes"., p. 115: "The catalog of murders is impressive enough; and Burke estimates that, from ancient times, thirty-six million people have been slaughtered by government. Burke examines the nature of the State. He points to the familiar fact that government do things for 'reasons of state' which individuals could not justly do. But he adds that these injustice are grounded on the very nature of the State itself, i.e., on the fact that the State is necessarily supported by violence." Citing Edmund Burke, Works (London, 1900), I, p. 21: "To prove that these sort of political societies are a violation offered to nature and constraint upon the human mind, it needs only to look upon the sanguinary measures, and instruments of violence, which are everywhere used to support them. Let us take a review of the dungeons, whips, chains, racks, gibbets, with which every society is abundantly stored ... I acknowledge, indeed, the necessity of such a proceedings in such institutions; but I must have a very mean opinion of institutions where such proceedings are necessary." Script error: No such module "Footnotes"., pp. 437–438: "Burke satirizes Bolingbroke's method in numerous ways. The main aim is to show a mind roving freely over all things, condemning all historical or present events or situations upon which it touches by comparing them with an imaginary natural society. After an introduction (9–14) in which Burke-as-Bolingbroke lays down his principles, attacks his opponents, and discourses on natural society, he enters into an examination of civil society (14–51), using, he says, history and experience as guides. He first examines civil society 'externally,' that is, the relations between states (14–30). He attempts to prove that there have been seventy-five times as many people killed as a result of wars as there are people alive on the earth at the time of his writing. He does this by estimating the number of dead as a result of the campaigns of various generals and of various wars, adding these calculations erroneously, and finally multiplying this figure by 1,000 to allow for error! He then as assesses the blame for this carnage on the existence of civil society by four amusing arguments, among which is a comparison with the state of nature and also with the relationship existing between animals."
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Footnotes"., pp. 115–116: "Burke proceeds to a discussion of the famous Aristotelian types of government: despotism, aristocracy, democracy. Each is taken up, examined, and found wanting. Despotism is obviously evil; but aristocracy is not better. In fact, an aristocracy is apt to be worse, since its rule is more permanent and does not depend on the whims of one man. And what of democracy? Here Burke draws on his store of knowledge of ancient Greece. Democracy is not only tyrannical, but bound to succumb to hatred of superior individuals. The rule of the people tends to be warlike and despotic, and to make heavy use of taxes and subsidies. Finally, Burke takes up the 'mixed' form of government, the form particularly admired by republican theorists in modern times. By a division and balance of powers, republican government is supposed to blend all three of these forms, so that each can check and balance the excesses of the other. Burke, confessing a former adherence to this system, plunges into an analysis of it, pursuing truth whenever it may lead. First, he says this intricate balance must necessarily be very delicate, and easily upset by one power or another. Second, overlapping spheres of powers create a constant source of confusion and argument. Third, the effect of the conflict between the various powers is that first one, and then the other, segment achieves dominant power in the endless struggle, and alternately tyrannizes over the people. Whichever party achieves power, tyranny is the result." Citing Edmund Burke, Works (London, 1900), I, p. 35: "... the balance is overset, now upon one side, now upon the other. The government is, one day, arbitrary power in a single person; another, a juggling confederacy of a few to cheat the prince, and enslave the people, and the third, a frantic and unmanageable democracy. The great instrument of all these changes ... is party ... ; the spirit which actuates all parties is the same; the spirit of ambition, of self-interest, of oppression, and treachery." Script error: No such module "Footnotes"., p. 438: "[Burke] next considers civil society 'internally' (30–51). He discovers that despotism is intolerable by citing Locke's opinion that anarchy is preferable. He discovers aristocracy to be worse because the policy is unchanging and because a remedy is more difficult to effect. Then he finds that democracy is even worse because, reversing the previous argument about aristocracy, it is too changeable and multiplies the evils of one or a few men through government by all men. Finally, he discovers that a mixed form of government combines the evils of all three monstrous systems he previously has annihilated and further objects that there exists in this system a constant fight among its parts. Thus Burke has Bolingbroke turn upside down the traditional belief, stemming ultimately from Aristotle, that mixed system as best, since they mitigate the errors of each class or part."
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Footnotes"., p. 117, citing Edmund Burke, Works (London, 1900), I, pp. 38–41. Script error: No such module "Footnotes"., p. 441. "[Burke] next attacks law (51–57) After comparing his methods of enquiry with those of the defenders of artificially society and showing the connection between professors of artificial religion and artificial society, he involves himself in a hypothetical law case in which he is soon very indignantly at the mercy of a pack of scoundrel lawyers who reduce him to penury and finally to slavery. He ends this section with his favorite comparison: of this law-ridden society and the happy state of nature.
Script error: No such module "Check for unknown parameters".
Bibliography
Primary sources
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
Secondary sources
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
Further reading
- Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
External links
- A Vindication of Natural Society at Online Library of Liberty
Template:Edmund Burke Template:Social philosophy Template:Authority control