by kthai

I can see where Burke is coming from. Revolution is chaotic, passionate, and perhaps infectious — he didn’t want the English to break away from their customs in a similar manner, but rather, in a cautious way with not too much change to challenge how things usually are.

But sometimes there needs to be radical change to put an end to tyranny, establish new customs, and better accomodate the people. Sometimes moderate, careful changes are slow and insufficient.

Paine talks about a lot but I’d like to pick this out…
Each generation may have different interpretations of laws or notions of what it should be to like to live in their time. I agree with Paine in that there doesn’t have to be such an adherence to “the manuscript assumed authority of the dead” especially if the authority of the dead restricts the rights and freedoms of those who are living (10). Laws should be able to evolve with the people to allow them to work towards what they deem a properly functioning system of government. What stifles them is the oppressive nature of a monarch, who makes changes as he sees fit — rarely benefiting the majority.
“Hereditary government is in its nature tyranny.” I like how Paine describes hereditary government. A heritable crown or throne is passed down as is mankind. “To inherit a government, is to inherit the people, as if they were flocks and herds.” (114) When something is viewed as property you own, you’ll likely feel it is your right to do whatever you please with it. There is a sense of superiority in that you are dominant; you are the owner of this thing. The implications are great here as the “things” inherited by a monarch are the lives of people. From the perspective of the hereditary monarch it’s probably tough to even conceive of why it’s necessary to consult the people at all.

That’s all for now,