Levin presents his arguments in an exceptionally clear and
concise manner. The book is quite readable and the structure of his argument is
built in sections presented in each chapter. One does not have to dig to any
depth to see where he wants to take the reader. Levin clearly understands Burke
and also has a good grasp of Paine.
Burke was the conservative, born in Ireland and raised in
the Church of England and a Member of Parliament. His career was highlighted by
his writings as compared to any Legislative prowess. Paine was class wise a
step or two below Burke, leaving England and starting anew in what was to become
the United States. His skill as a pamphleteer was extraordinary and in so doing
he absorbed and even created the sense of his times. Paine personally paid for
his major work, Common Sense, which in many ways ignited the Revolution.
Levin begins by providing a brief overview of the lives of
the two men. It is well done but it in some ways fails to dig deeper and
understand what may have made a Paine and a Burke. Paine was in a sense an
entrepreneur, he abandoned England and his “place in that society” to travel to
American where he could create the person he became. Paine was the risk taker,
seeing the need for change, albeit with risk, and taking the chance. Burke in
total contrast knew his places and sought ways to maximize the best as possible
his position in that place. Burke not only accepted the system as is but proselytized
that system as the sine qua non of how things should be. Paine rejected that
system and saw in the individual the path to change.
The reader should have some knowledge of the times to best
understand some of the content. Let me provide a first example. On p 31 in
discussing Burke there is the statement “Praising the gradualism of the English
constitution …” First, there is no document in existence which one can call the
English Constitution. Second, when one looks for the English constitution one
starts with the Magna Carta and then proceeds forward with an amalgam of Laws,
Parliamentary proceedings and the rulings from Common Law courts, namely precedents.
In addition the English constitution assumes that English society is built
around three classes; the Crown, the Aristocracy, and the Commons. Namely, one
always knew one’s place, and one must act accordingly. It was this theme which
flows throughout the book and also was essential to Burke’s thought. In
contrast in America one could be whatever one wanted, and class was essentially
non-existent, thanks in many ways in which the English ruled.
There is a second theme that flows throughout the book,
individualism. Levin comment on p 29 as follows: “Burke laid out an argument
against radical individualism,” A major issue which needs clarification is;
what is the definition of individualism? This terms in in Burke and it returns
a few decades later in de Tocqueville as a major characteristic of America in
the early 19th century. Individualism was in many ways a rejection
of the Burkean conservatism, namely of a society with an immutable class
system, a society of strict structure. On p 36 the author states the core set
of points upon which the battle between Burke and Paine rested, namely;
“…what makes a government legitimate, what the individual’s
place is in the larger society, and how each government should think about
those who came before and those who will come after.”
This question then flows throughout the book. Levin does a
splendid job and going back and forth from Burke to Paine and exploring the
details of the answers thereto.
Chapter 2 presents the two varying views of Nature that each
had. These world views become the platforms upon which they build their ideas
of government and society. To Burke there is formality and structure. Burke was
a traditionalist, a royalist. On p 61 Levin presents the famous quote from
Burke’s Reflections where he states:
“We fear God; we look up with awe to kings; with affection
to parliaments; with duty to magistrates; with reverence to priests; and with
respect to nobility.”
This as Levin note is the totality of Burke’s world view.
The irony is that Burke, as an Irishman by birth, with a Catholic mother, see reverence
to priests of the English Church but death to the priests of the Catholic or
Irish Church. Again one must read de Tocqueville’s comparative journey through
Ireland in the mid-19th Century to best understand this comparison.
The question is; is this conservatism or a dogmatic slavish following akin to
Stalinism?
In contrast Levin ascribes a “radical liberal thinker” to
Paine (p 57) and these types of thinkers, says Levin, “leave the human
sentiments and role of the imagination out of the understanding of human nature”.
This was an Enlightenment battle between reason and custom.
In Chapter 3 the author begins a discussion of Justice and
Order. He states on p 69, “For Paine, the appeal to nature is primarily an
appeal to justice.” One must ask; what definition of justice do we use here? On
p 71 Levin presents an excellent discussion of the integration in Burke’s
conservatism of utilitarian ideas, a “procedural conservative” mind.
Chapter 4 is a key chapter wherein the issue of individual
choice and obligations (duties) are discussed. This chapter alone is worth
reading. As Levin states on p 92; “The idea of rights sits at the core of
Thomas Paine’s political philosophy. Rights are the organizing principle of his
thought and the prime concern of all his writings about government.” But what
is most important is that rights refer to the individual, each individual, qua
individual, has the rights. The rights are not group rights; they are rights to
the person. Burke vied society as an amalgam, he rejected the individual qua
individual. Burke believed in classes, groups, because English society was so
structured. Paine understood most clearly as a result of the discussion of the
Bill of Rights that they accrued to the person, each and every person. In
contrast Levin speaks of Burke on p 101 where he states: “As Burke sees it,
each man is in society not by choice but by birth. And the facts of his birth –
the family, the station, and the nation he is born into – exert inescapable
demands on him, while also granting him some privileges and protection …” One
need go no further to understand the difference. To Paine the individual is
unbounded in potential, to Burke the individual is molded by eons of history
and genetics. England had its Aristocracy, a core element in its English constitution;
America had the individual, and the Bill of Rights.
Chapter 5 the author discusses Reason and Prescription.
Reason is the core to the Enlightenment, namely by reason we can come to truth.
Prescription is term defined by Levin on p 1`40 as; “The term prescription
originated in Roman property law, where it referred to ownership by virtue of
long-term use, rather than by formal deed.” Simply put, the battle between
Reason and Prescription is the battle between what we think NOW is best as
compared to what tradition had determined as best. It arguably is what many think
is the contrast between liberal and conservative in current day America. I
would argue that perhaps that is not the case and that the battle is truly
between the individual versus the group. But here in two adjoining chapters
Levin lays out the principles as advocated by Burke and Paine, and as battled
today.
There is an undercurrent discussion in Chapter 5 as well,
the discussion on equality. On p 151 there is a discussion of equality and the
individual. For Paine one should be allowed to open the discussion up on the
laws at least in every generation, for Burke he sees a slow representative
government. The issue is the individual and equality. This theme comes again
when Paine enters the fray of the French Revolution. The Liberty, Equality,
Fraternity motto was focused on Liberty in the Americas and Equality in France.
One can see Paine struggling with this issue. Whereas Liberty is consonant with
Individualism, Equality may be taken to an extreme and destroy the individual. The
resolution is left unsaid.
On p 153 the author makes a most important observation; “”He
(Paine) argues that every individual is capable of employing his own reason to
discern the truth or falsehood of a political question … Paine believes that
every individual has the capacity to begin from scratch, rather than beginning
where others left off.”
In the Conclusion the author makes the following statement
on p 237:
“The fundamental utopian goal at the core of Paine’s
thinking – the goal of liberating the individual from the constraints of the
obligations imposed upon him by his time, his place, and his relations to
others – remains essential to the left in America.”
I would argue that Paine placed power in the individual and
not the group and that the left empowers the group often against the
individual. Progressive ideas are ideas of group culture and are often opposed
to individual culture. Paine I would argue is the champion of the individual
and it is Burke who empowers the group. But Levin does a superb job in bringing
these issues to the fore. His book is an essential read for anyone who wants to
understand the differences in our present day culture and more importantly the
bases from which they sprung. What makes a conservative or a progressive? This
book helps one think through that process better than any other.
Posts
