Burke vs. Paine

Personally, I found Thomas Paine’s argument to be the most persuasive and reasonable argument in favor of the French revolution. He makes excellent points against Burke’s argument when he states “Mr. Burke is contending for the authority of the dead over the rights and freedom of living.” Also I agree with Paine when he claims that “Mr. Burke shews that he is ignorant of the springs and principles of the French revolution.”

After reading Paine’s excerpt I agree that the French revolution was necessary or any revolution is needed, for that matter, when a government is not protecting the natural rights of its own citizens. For example, people were starving due to high bread prices and bad harvesting prior to the revolution. Not to mention, France was under great financial stress considering they had fought numerous wars before. Obviously change was not only desired but necessary for France to mature and improve as a nation. I got the “vibe” from Burke’s argument that the citizen’s of France had no right to revolt or even attempt to overthrow their government no matter what the circumstances may be. This is a displeasing opinion to me because if there was not any disagreement or even revolts against authority (throughout history) then how would any reform (for the better) have taken place and how would corruption have ceased? Plus (as I stated earlier) if a government is not doing its job then citizens absolutely have the right to push for a reform or revolution. I think Paine would agree since he declares “..that there are rights which men inherit at their birth…not from their forefathers but, from God..” Burke, I think, was more focused on the forefathers and tradition which is why I think Paine makes the claim that Burke is more focused on the “authority of the dead over the rights and freedom of living.”