.png)
 |
| Sean Southard |
By Sean Southard, Class of 2015
Most will be familiar with the different theories of social contract proposed by Locke, Hobbes, and Rousseau. I am only somewhat familiar with these definitions, but in my view it seems these thinkers believe a social contract is an agreement among people who choose to secure certain rights and liberties for themselves. One flaw resonates throughout these theories of social contract: the idea that rights and liberties are given up for themselves. In these social contracts, living people make decisions for the present. There is no consideration of the past and the future. Such a flaw does not appear in the contract theory of Edmund Burke. Burke’s contract theory stands paramount among the rest and provides a way to reconsider our view of the political climate.
In Reflections on the Revolution in France (1790), Edmund Burke challenged the French Revolutionaries and the underpinnings of the French Revolution of 1789. He compared their Reign of Terror to the Glorious Revolution of 1688 in England and dismissed the actions taken by the French revolutionaries, denouncing them as motivated by self-interest and greed. Burke saw them as seeking to destroy political, social, and theological institutions while redistributing wealth. Championing abstract rights and liberties in the name of Reason, these radicals were making passion-filled decisions without deliberating on the consequences.
Burke's definition of social contract comes out of his belief that good government is a gift from God. Because government is a divine gift to creation, morality and government cannot be separated. No man should act out his selfish desires as a member of a governing body. Rather, legislators should consider the potential repercussions of legislating for the moment on future generations. From this thought, Burke believed society was a contract between the living, dead, and unborn. Such a contract takes our modern idea of government outside the political realm and into the transcendental one. Truly, this definition differs from what the contemporary world calls the goal of good government.
Burke's loathing of the French Revolution is better understood when one understands the partnership shared by the dead, living and unborn. By beheading their King and Queen, distributing Church property and wealth, and engaging in diabolical acts of terrorism, the French were acting thoughtlessly. They did not consider the lessons history had to offer from across the pond in the Glorious Revolution. They rallied around their desires and celebrated their spoils of false freedom by living lives ripe with debauchery and leisure, directing dissenters to the guillotine.
We too, in this country, are guilty of ignoring the responsibilities required of us. Russell Kirk, a man of letters, once wrote, "The modern spectacle of vanished forests and eroded lands, wasted petroleum and ruthless mining, national debts recklessly increased...(this) is evidence of what an age without veneration does to itself and its successors." Kirk penned this line in mid-20th century. Today, he would be appalled to see how individualistic and materialistic our culture has become. Individuals, as well as governments, are guilty of not considering the effects their actions will have on their families and communities.
Does a place today exist for Burke's contract theory? A politician, or statesman, seeped in these ideas would reject pledges and political action committees in the name of what is Good, True, and Beautiful. He would value providential reform over swift change; decentralized power over the centralized kind; his little platoon over the District of Columbia.
By Burke’s theory, we must acknowledge that governments are not established to protect abstract rights but rather that governments are called to be stewards of the transcendental ties of man to man, man to woman, both to children, all to nature and to their God. Attempts to disrupt the eternal linking of those who are living, those who are dead, and those who are to be born, are attempts to destroy true rights and relationships. By rekindling the fiery thought of Edmund Burke, we will cherish history and the gifts endowed to us by our Creator. It would be wise to reconsider the way we view our political world.
Sean Southard, of Owensboro, Ky., is a sophomore McConnell Scholar at the University of Louisville. He is studying political science and history.