A Note on Burke's Vindication of Natural Society

Author(s): Murray N. Rothbard

Source: Journal of the History of Ideas, Vol. 19, No. 1 (Jan., 1958), pp. 114-118
Published by: University of Pennsylvania Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2707957 .
Accessed: 20/06/2014 15:27

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

University of Pennsylvania Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Journal of the History of Ideas.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 194.29.185.145 on Fri, 20 Jun 2014 15:27:04 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 A NOTE ON BURKE'S VINDICATION OF NATURAL SOCIETY

BY MuIRRAY
N. ROTHBARD

In 1756EdmundBurkepublishedhis firstwork:Vindication ofNatural

Society. Curiously enoughit has beenalmostcompletely ignoredinthecur-
rentBurkerevival. This workcontrasts sharply with Burke's otherwrit-
ings,forit is hardlyin keepingwiththecurrent imageoftheFatherofthe
New Conservatism.A lessconservative workcouldhardlybe imagined;in
fact,Burke'sVindication was perhapsthe firstmodemexpression of ra-
tionalisticand individualistic
anarchism.
It is wellknownthatBurkespenttherestofhiscareerbattlingforviews
diametrically oppositetothoseofhisVindication.His ownbelatedexplana-
tionwas thattheVindication was a satireon theviewsofrationalist Deists
likeLord Bolingbroke, demonstrating thata devotionto reasonand an at-
tack on revealedreligioncan logicallyeventuatein a subversive attackon
theprinciple ofgovernment itself.Burke'shostofbiographers andfollowers
have tendedto adopthis explanation uncritically.Yet theyhurryon and
rarelymention his Vindicationin theirdiscussionsofBurke,and withgood
reason. For theworkis a mostembarrassing one. Carefulreadingreveals
hardlya traceof ironyor satire. In fact,it is a verysoberand earnest
treatise,writtenin his characteristic style. Indeed,Burke'sbiographers
have commented on the failureof the workas irony,withoutraisingthe
fundamental questionwhether it was reallymeantto be ironyat all.
Burke'sownexplanation, in fact,is not a veryplausibleone. He was
notgivento satire,and rarelyattempted suchwriting in lateryears. The
Vindication was publishedanonymously whenBurkewas 27 yearsold. Nine
yearslater,afterhis authorship had beendiscovered, Burkefoundhimself
aboutto embarkon his famousParliamentary career. To admitthat he
had seriouslyheldsuchviewsin earlieryearswouldhave beenpolitically
disastrous.His onlyway outwas to brushit offas a satire,thereby vindi-
catinghimselfas an eternalenemyof rationalism and subversion.

BurkebeginstheVindication by establishingthe aim ofhis inquiry:to

investigatewiththelightoftruththegeneralnatureofpoliticalinstitutions
or " politicalsociety." He rejectsat the outsetthe typicallyconservative
reluctanceto tamperwithprevalentbeliefsand ancienttraditions.He
upholdsthatnobletenetofeighteenth-century rationalism:thathappiness,
in the longrun,restson truthand truthalone. Andthattruthis thena-
turallaw ofhumanactivityand humanrelations.Positivelaw imposedby
theStateinjuresmanwhenever it straysfromthepaththatwe knowto be
the law of man'snature. How is thenaturallaw to be discovered?Not
by Revelation,butby theuse ofman'sreason.
It is characteristicof Burkethat he developshis examination of the
State throughhistoricalinquiry. First,thereare the externalrelations
amongStates. He findsthetypicalrelationis war. War is practically the
114

This content downloaded from 194.29.185.145 on Fri, 20 Jun 2014 15:27:04 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 BURKE'S VINDICA TION 115

onlyexternalface of the State; and Burkepointsout that Machiavelli's

emphasisonwarforthestudyofhisPrinceappliesto all forms ofstatesand
notjustto monarchies.Burke,in obviousdisgust, goesonto chroniclesome
ofthe notable" butcheries " in whichstateshave indulged. " All empires
havebeencemented in blood" and in mutualattempts at destruction.And
BurkewittilydeducesthatHobbes'appallingviewofmankindin thestate
of naturewas derived,not fromHobbes' observations of ordinaryhuman
action,but fromhis studyoftheactionsofmenwhenbandedtogether into
states.
The catalogofmurders is impressiveenough;and Burkeestimates that,
fromancienttimes,thirty-six millionpeople have been slaughteredby
governments. But Burkeis notcontentto stopthere. Why,he asks,why
does evil centerin States? He findsthe answerin thenatureofthe State
itself. All " politicalsociety" restson subordination
on theone hand,and
tyrannyon the other.
Burke examinesthe natureof the State. He pointsto the familiar
factthatgovernments do things" forreasonsof state" whichindividuals
couldnotjustlydo. But he adds thattheseinjusticesare grounded on the
verynatureoftheState itself,i.e.,on thefactthattheState is necessarily
supported by violence:
To provethat thesesortsof politicalsocietiesare a violationoffered to
nature,and a constraintuponthehumanmind,it needsonlyto lookupon
the sanguinarymeasures,and instruments of violence,whichare every-
whereusedto supportthem. Let us take a reviewofthedungeons, whips,
chains,racks,gibbets,withwhicheverysocietyis abundantly stored....
I acknowledge, indeed,the necessityof such a proceedingin such insti-
tutions;but I musthave a verymean opinionof institutions wheresuch
proceedingsare necessary.'
Burkeproceedsto a discussionofthefamousAristotelian typesof gov-
ernment: despotism, aristocracy,democracy.Each is takenup, examined,
and foundwanting. Despotismis obviouslyevil; but aristocracyis not
better. In fact,an aristocracy is apt to be worse,sinceits rule is more
permanent and does not dependon the whimsof one man. And whatof
democracy?HereBurkedrawson hisstoreofknowledge ofancientGreece.
Democracyis not only tyrannical,but boundto succumbto hatredof
superiorindividuals.The ruleof the peopletendsto be warlikeand des-
potic,and to makeheavyuse oftaxes and subsidies.
Finally,Burketakes up the "mixed" formof government, the form
particularlyadmiredby republican theorists in moderntimes. By a divis-
ion and balanceofpowers,republicangovernment is supposedto blendall
threeoftheseforms, so thateach can checkand balancetheexcessesofthe
other. Burke,confessing a former adherenceto thissystem,plungesinto
an analysisof it,pursuing truthwherever it may lead. First,he says this
balancemustnecessarily
intricate be verydelicate,and easilyupsetby one
poweror another.Second,overlapping spheresofpowerscreatea constant
sourceofconfusion and argument.Third,theeffect oftheconflict between
1 EdmundBurke,Works(London,1900),I, 21.

This content downloaded from 194.29.185.145 on Fri, 20 Jun 2014 15:27:04 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
116 MURRAY N. ROTHBARD

the variouspowersis thatfirstone,and thenthe other,segmentachieves

dominantpowerin the endlessstruggle, and alternately
tyrannizesover
thepeople. Whichever partyachievespower,tyrannyis the result:
. . .the balanceis overset,nowupon one side,nowuponthe other. The
government powerin a singleperson;another,
is, one day,arbitrary a jug-
glingconfederacy of a fewto cheattheprince,and enslavethepeople,and
thethird,a frantic and unmanageable democracy.The greatinstrument of
all these changes . . . is party . . . ; the spiritwhich actuates all parties is
the same; the spiritof ambition,of self-interest,
of oppression,
and trea-
chery.2
The Vindication containsmuchrhetoricabout inequalitybetweenthe
rich and the poor. Close examinationreveals,however,that Burke is
writing notaboutsocial classesbut aboutsocial castes,i.e.,he is referring
to the artificialinequalitiesof wealthresulting fromstateactionsand not
to the inequalitiesresultingfromfreeaction. Burke is denouncing the
slavery,poverty, and vicesintroduced by " politicalsociety."
It shouldbe clearfromthisworkthatby " politicalsociety,"Burkedid
notsignify " society" in general. This is no Rousseauancall fora return
to thejungle,eitherearnestly or satirically.Burke'sattackis levellednot
againstsociety-theframework of peacefulhumaninterrelations and ex-
changes,butagainststates-thoseuniquelycoerciveelements in humanre-
lations. His argument restson a beliefthatwhenwe observethe nature
ofman,we findthatstatesare anti-socialinstitutions.
" Anarchism " is an extreme term,butno othercan adequatelydescribe
Burke'sthesis. Again and again,he emphatically denouncesany and all
government, and not just specificformsof government.Summingup his
viewson government, he declares:
The severalspeciesof government vie witheach otherin the absurdityof
theirconstitutions,and the oppressionwhichtheymaketheirsubjectsen-
dure. Take themunderwhat formyou please,theyare in effectbut a
despotism ....
Parties in religionand politicsmake sufficientdiscoveriesconcerning
each other,to givea sobermanpropercautionagainstthemall. The mon-
and popularpartisanshave beenjointlylaying
archist,and aristocratical,
theiraxesto therootofall government, and havein theirturnsprovedeach
otherabsurdand inconvenient. In vain you tellme thatartificial
govern-
mentis good,but thatI fall out onlywiththe abuse. The thing! The
thingitselfis theabuse13
All government, Burke adds, is foundedon one "grand error." It was
observedthat men sometimescommitviolenceagainstone another,and
thatit is thereforenecessaryto guardagainstsuchviolence. As a result,
men appointgovernors amongthem. But who is to defendthe people
againstthegovernors?
The anarchismof Burke'sVindicationis negative,ratherthanpositive.
ofthe
It consistsof an attackon theStateratherthana positiveblueprint
2 Ibid., 35.
3 Ibid., 46, 32-33.

This content downloaded from 194.29.185.145 on Fri, 20 Jun 2014 15:27:04 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 BURKE'S VINDICATION 117

typeof societywhichBurkewouldregardas ideal. Consequently, both

the communist and theindividualistwingsof anarchism have drawnsuste-
nancefromthiswork. WilliamGodwin,the late eighteenth-century Eng-
lishfounder ofcommunist anarchism, hailedtheVindicationas a precursor
of his own viewpoint.On the otherhand,an Englishdiscipleof Josiah
Warren'sindividualist anarchismreprinted the Vindicationin 1858,with
appropriatemarginalcomment, and it was highlypraisedand reprinted
by BenjaminR. Tuckerin Libertyin 1885. On balance,it wouldbe fair,
thoughinconclusive, to place the Vindicationin the individualistcamp,
sincethereis no signofenmity to privatepropertyas suchinthiswork.

Thereare manyinternalindications thatthisis a soberworkby Burke,

and nota satire.In thefirstplace,thereis histreatment ofreason. One of
Burke'smostcharacteristic viewsin his lateryears,and one thatparticu-
larlyendearshimto the New Conservatives, is his distrustof reason. In
particular, whowishto plan the livesof peoplein theway
therationalists
an engineer buildsa machine,are contrasted withconservatives who rely
on spontaneousand unplannedchange. It would seem,therefore, that
Burke'srelianceon reasonin the Vindication is simplya satireon these
views. But thisis notthe case at all. In upholding
rationalist reasonas
the bulwarkof his extreme views,Burkealso attacksthosera-
libertarian
tionalistswho wish to plan and tyrannizeover society. But he attacks
themnotbecausetheyare rationalists, butprecisely becausetheyare false
to reason. They are not rationalistenoughto realizethe rationalityof
liberty. Theyengagein " artificialreason" insteadof " naturalreason":
Duringthe courseof my inquiryyou may have observeda verymaterial
differencebetweenmymannerofreasoning and thatwhichis in use among
the abettorsof artificial
society. They formtheirplansuponwhatseems
mosteligibleto theirimaginations,fortheorderingofmankind.I discover
themistakesin thoseplans,fromthe realknownconsequences whichhave
resultedfromthem. They have enlistedreasonto fightagainstitself...
in proportionas we have deviatedfromthe plain ruleof our nature,and
turnedour reasonagainstitself,in thatproportion have we increasedthe
folliesand miseriesofmankind.4
Secondly,if Burkehad meantto impugnBolingbroke's Deist views,he
wouldhave denounced" artificialreligion " equally or morethan he de-
nouncesgovernment.But, on the contrary, Burke explicitlystatesthat
government is a fargreaterevil.5
Anotherpiece of evidenceforthe seriousness of the Vindicationis its
bitterdenunciation oflawyersand legalprocedures.We knowthatBurke,
in thisperiod,was an unhappylaw student,fedup withlaw and eagerly
turning to literatureand literarycompanions.His bitterpassageson Law
in the Vindication withwhatwe knowof his feelingsin this
fitperfectly
period.6But ifthesepassagesare faithfulto Burke'sgenuineopinions,why
4Ibid.,37.
6 Ibid.,46-47.
6IWi., 38-1.

This content downloaded from 194.29.185.145 on Fri, 20 Jun 2014 15:27:04 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
118 MURRAY N. ROTHBARD

nottherestoftheworkas well?
Historianshave stressedthat the Vindication was writtenin imitation
ofthestyleoftherecently dead Bolingbroke, and have takenthisas proof
ofits satiricbent. Yet thesesamebiographers ofBurkeadmitthat,in his
laterwritings, he continuedto writein a similarstyle! Is it, in fact,sur-
prisingthatyoungBurkeshouldtryto imitatethe styleof the man uni-
versallyacknowledged as thegreateststylistand oratorofhisday? Burke's
elaborateefforts to shieldhis identity
fromthepublic,to givethe impres-
sionthatthiswas;a posthumous workof Bolingbroke's, hintat a different
explanation.This is his realizationthat the kind of views expressedin
theVindication wouldbe bitterly reviledand denounced.Let us remember
that this workwas the firstexpression of anarchism, perhapsthe most
"radical," the least " conservative" of creeds. The whole tone of the
Vindication, indeed,is thatof a manwho fearsthe personalconsequences
of publishing his,views,who evenattempts to holdthemback,but is im-
pelledonwardsby the forceof his conviction that a new and greattruth
has beendiscovered.Burkediscloses:
These and manymorepointsI am farfromspreading to theirfullextent.
You are sensiblethatI do notput forthhalfmystrength; and you cannot
be at a lossforthereason. A manis allowedsufficient
freedom ofthought,
providedhe knowshowto choosehis subjectsproperly.You maycriticize
freelyuponthe Chineseconstitution,and observewithas muchseverity as
you please upon the absurdtricksor destructivebigotryof the bonzees.
But the sceneisichangedas you comehomeward, and atheismor treason
may be namesgivenin Britain,to whatwouldbe reasonand truthif as-
sertedof China.7
The following
passageis particularly
striking:
Whentheworldis in a fitter
temperthanit is at presentto heartruth,or
whenI shallbe moreindifferent
aboutitstemper, mythoughts maybecome
morepublic. In themeantime,let themreposein my ownbosom,and in
thebosomsof suchmenas are fitto be initiatedin thesobermysteries
of
truthand reason.8
Perhapsthesewordsprovidetheclueto themystery ofthe Vindication.
If theworkwerereallya satire,whyonlyproclaimit as suchwhena rising
politicalcareerwas at stake? Whynot announceit shortlyafterpublica-
tion? AndiftheBurkeof Vindication was in deadlyearnest,did he really
changehis earlierviews,or did thisgreatadvocateof prudencebow pru-
dentlyto thepublictemper?
NewYorkCity.
7Ibid.,36.
8Ibid., 32.

This content downloaded from 194.29.185.145 on Fri, 20 Jun 2014 15:27:04 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions