Dispute Issue Between Edmund Burke & Thomas Paine

The French Revolution, on the separate hand, represented the wholesale overthrow of the established social order. The monarchy and untold of the aristocracy were put to the sword (or the guillotine blade) by the unpropertied masses. The centuries-old ruleing body of govern manpowert was violently set aside, replaced by a commonwealth in name. In remove's eyes, the mass of the population ran amok, destroying ein truththing which displeased them, including that which was good. France in the late 1780s and early 1790s was every bit as hugger-mugger as Russia in 1917 and 1918. Even those who supported the Revolution admitted that the policy-making situation in France in those years was little much than a tyranny of the masses.

However, these supporters, including Paine, claimed that such a situation was an necessary result of the centuries-old tyranny of the monarchy. The monarchical system of brass was the scourge form of government there could be, for it flouted the will of those who were governed. Natural sovereignty lay with the throng, not with the Crown. Governors must only govern with the hope of the governed. To do otherwise would violate the inwrought justifiedlys of men, those rights all individuals ar born with. The law of the land can only feed from these rights; it must serve to protect them. Law made by monarchs who rule without the consent of the governed is illegitimate and not worthy of obedience. In the final ana

And it is human disposition which Paine sought to elevate to the status of natural law. All individuals project an inner sense of self-determination. Paine was hotshot who believed that human nature was basically good. Men could be trusted to contain their own leaders, to govern themselves through popularly elected representatives. The examples of America and France were showing this to men all over the world and Paine believed that it was folly to try and fix ignorance, no matter how fancy the words and grammatical constructions one used (357-58). Thus, he rejected Burke's idea of history and customs defining rights.

Paine, Thomas. The Rights of Man. New York: Doubleday, 1973, 1989.

Paine's basic argument was therefore very simple: men have the inherent right to choose their governors; consequently, they also have the inherent right to throw away their governors if they prove to be despots. And they have the right to overthrow a system of government if that proves to be supreme. It was this last line of conclude which justified the French Revolution in Paine's eyes. While Burke deplored the overthrow and execution of a monarch who was relatively contribute in actions, Paine argued that the moderation of Louis XIV did not excuse the despotic nature of the French monarchy as a whole. The French people revolted against the despotism of the principles of monarchy (283-85).

In conclusion, Edmund Burke and Thomas Paine faced apiece other across a sea of difference. Burke rallied in support of monarchy and traditional notions of rule, arguing that the only individual rights were those develop by rulers. There certainly was no natural right of the governed to choose their governors. Paine, however, said that Burke was absolutely wrong. Individuals were born with natural rights. Because monarchical rule opposed this notion, it was an evil system of government and men had every right to overthrow it. The horrors of the Revolution could not overshadow
Ordercustompaper.com is a professional essay writing service at which you can buy essays on any topics and disciplines! All custom essays are written by professional writers!