Fri 31st Oct 2014 | Last updated: Fri 31st Oct 2014 at 16:19pm

Facebook Logo Twitter Logo RSS Logo

Features

Our worn-out liberalism needs Burke’s good sense

The father of modern conservatism offers fresh ideas for both Left and Right

By on Monday, 5 August 2013

Edmund Burke, as painted by Joshua Reynolds

Edmund Burke, as painted by Joshua Reynolds

 

Publishing is often about timing, and the praise rightly lumped on Jesse Norman’s new biography reflects the fact that our political discourse has for too long had a Burke-shaped hole. As the author says in the second part of the book, which focuses on the politician’s ideas, Burke’s reputation has gone through boom and bust since his death in 1797, but the last few years have been lean ones. Now, with the current crisis of liberalism, both social and economic, he suggests that Burke is due a comeback, and not necessarily just on the Right.

Born in Dublin in 1729, Burke came from a mixed marriage. It was through his Catholic mother, Mary, that he developed his instinctive sympathy for the plight of the country’s mostly poor majority. His relationship with his Protestant father, Richard, seemed to have been difficult, although he did pay for Edmund to attend Trinity College Dublin and then the Middle Temple in London.

Burke arrived in the Great Wen at a time when clubs were flowering, and these played a crucial part in the development of British politics and capitalism (in contrast, the French regime discouraged them as potential conspiratorial). Burke’s was simply called The Club, and met from 1764 in the Turk’s Head tavern in Soho. Among its nine founding members were Burke himself, Joshua Reynolds, Oliver Goldsmith and Samuel Johnson. That’s some fantasy dinner party. And let’s not forget Burke’s Edinburgh connections: on a visit to London David Hume gave him a copy of The Theory of Moral Sentiments by Adam Smith.

Burke’s first published work was in 1754 and three years later came A Philosophical Enquiry Into the Origin of Our Ideas of the Sublime and Beautiful, which contained the germ of many Burkean themes, as Norman notes. He wrote that humans “are social animals heavily driven by instinct and emotion. The testimony of ordinary people is often of greater value than that of experts. Human passions are guided by empathy and imagination. Human well-being is grounded in a social order whose values are given by divine providence.”

The following year he signed a contract to write a history of England, which he never finished, and set up the Annual Register magazine. He also married Jane Nugent, the daughter of a Catholic doctor who possibly treated him. The couple had two sons, although their otherwise uneventful home life would be marked by tragedy. Indeed there were few happy endings for this pessimistic conservative. Constantly struggling for money, he spent much of his time trying – and failing – to fight corruption, such as his 10-year struggle to have Warren Hastings impeached, which, like so much of his life, ended in failure. Despite a long career in parliament, he spent just two years in government and the political manoeuvering of the time left him outflanked.

It was, in fairness, a period of immense corruption, with tiny constituencies where a handful of electors were kept pickled in alcohol by the ruling families. In fighting for Chester in 1784 the Grosvenor family paid for 1,187 barrels of ale, 3,756 gallons of rum and brandy, and more than 27,000 bottles of wine, for just 1,500 voters. In Gloucester in 1761 two voters died from the practice of “keeping them dead drunk to the day of election”.

Throughout this period, and until the French Revolution, Burke was not recognisably “Right-wing”, as it would later be called. He supported Catholic emancipation and argued in favour of conciliation with the American colonies. Burke was not against all change, just extreme change. As he wrote in a 1779 letter: “Moderation is a virtue not only amiable but powerful. It is a disposing, arranging, conciliating, cementing virtue.” In Norman’s words: “For radical change to be genuinely worthwhile, it must bring overwhelming social benefit, or be the product of the most extreme necessity.”

The central theme of Burkean thought would, of course, come to the fore in his Reflections on the Revolution in France, written in the style of a letter to the pro-revolutionary Whig clubs in London. An instant bestseller, although outsold by Thomas Paine’s counterblast Rights of Man, it articulated many conservative principles. Burke believed in liberty, compassion, in helping the poor and tolerance, but he was opposed to abstract ideas, which he believed had brought disaster to France. As he wrote in A Letter to the Sheriffs of Bristol: “What is the use of discussing a man’s abstract right to food or medicine? The question is upon the method of procuring them and administering them… I shall always advise to call in aid of the farmer and the physician, rather than the professor of metaphysics.”

Alas, he would go to the grave before his accurate prophecy of dictatorship in Paris came to pass. On his death, he was a rather marginalised figure, with some suspecting him of going mad – or Catholic. Most heartbreaking of all, his only surviving child, Richard, died before him.

Burke’s ideas, of course, survive him, and are due a comeback, especially chiming with the political cross-dressing movement vaguely known as post-liberalism, which would include David Goodhart, David Willetts, Jonathan Haidt and both the Red Tory and Blue Labour scene. Among those ideas: “Man is a social animal; people naturally imitate each other; they cooperate and compete; and they establish practices, habits, rules and codes of behaviour which make this cooperation and competition possible.”

Instead, many in positions of power have become lost in collective egoism, so that, as Norman writes, “whole generations may see themselves as no longer bound by the basic trust which unites past, present and future generations”.

That sums up, sadly, the thinking that has come to dominate both the Labour and Conservative movements. So it is reassuring that Norman is on the backbenches and, by all accounts, destined for the front. This well-crafted, engaging biography-cum-political guide to Burke is, ironically, a cause for great optimism.

This article first appeared in the print edition of The Catholic Herald, dated 2/8/13

 

  • A Mighty Fortress

    I very much doubt he would have become Roman Catholic if abstract ideas repelled him. He would have had absolutely no time for the scholastic method, which is the basis for the most vehement disagreement between Anglicans and Roman Catholics (transubstantiation is an Aristotlean construct). If he had lived long enough I could have seen him in the Oxford Movement, but Rome? Nah.

  • http://davidaslindsay.blogspot.co.uk/ David Lindsay

    “Before Red Tory and Blue Labour there was David Lindsay. He was arguably the first to
    announce a postliberal politics of paradox, and to delve into the deep, unwritten British past in order to craft, theoretically, an alternative British and international future. It is high time that the singular and yet wholly pertinent writings of this County Durham Catholic Labour prophet receive a wider circulation.” Professor John Milbank, Professor in Religion, Politics and Ethics, University of Nottingham.

    As to where Burke would be on the British political spectrum in 2013 – http://londonprogressivejournal.com/article/view/1501/edmund-burke-would-be-labour-in

  • 676aldhelmstown710

    One of Edmund Burke’s comments is :- ” All that is necessary for the triumph of evil as that good men do nothing.”

  • Apostolic

    Burke venerated what he called that “monkish education” that had moulded Europe in general and England in particular through the Catholic Church, whose liberty was guaranteed by Magna Carta. He championed the cause of civil rights for Catholics in Quebec and in Ireland, then highly unpopular in Britain. He abhorred anti-Catholic bigotry in all its forms and was caricatured as a Jesuit in many contemporary cartoons. His statement that “in what we conserve, we are never wholly old. In what we innovate, we are never wholly new”, anticipates John Henry Newman’s analysis of the development of the Catholic Church.

  • KennethKrieger

    The left is not right and the right is not right. Every issue is right or wrong not left and right. We spend double for both education and health care. The Democrats want to spend more to waste more, while the Republicans present no ideas. The Democrats can not prove Global Warming so they call it Climate Change. Any swing in temperature, rain, snow or hurricanes they say is proof, even when there isn’t any. Democrats can not win with out the majority of the Black and Hispanic vote, so they keep them stirred up. Both groups are abused mentally by the negative rhetoric and commit many more crimes and take more drugs than the White population. Let not forget the liberal press whom do not know right from wrong and who are committed to false charity. The rich can not pay enough in taxes so it becomes a burden placed on the middleclass. I want a small government and a thinking press that is not socialist. Kenneth Krieger Cape Coral, Florida