Previous
Section 3
Themes
Key
LitCharts assigns a color and icon to each theme in Reflections on the Revolution in France, which you can use to track the themes throughout the work.
The Use and Abuse of History
Nature, Tradition, and Wisdom
Revolution and Reform
Theory vs. Practicality
Summary
Analysis
The Revolution Society’s second claim is that people have “a right of cashiering their governors for misconduct.” Burke points out that those who influenced the abdication of King James desired that Glorious Revolution to be “a parent of settlement, and not a nursery of future revolutions.”
From refuting the first argument that the people have the right to choose their own governors, Burke now moves on to refuting the claim that the people can depose their governors. Burke continues to stress his own claim that present-day revolutionaries misunderstand and misuse the aims of their historical forebears; the Glorious Revolution was meant to settle things, not stir them up.
Themes
“Misconduct” is such a loose term that any government could be undone by it. The leaders of the Glorious Revolution relied on no such term; they charged James with the subversion of the Protestant Church and state and with breaking the contract between king and people—much more than mere “misconduct.” Their aim was not to rely on more revolutions in the future, but to “render it almost impracticable” for any future sovereign to do as James did. That’s also why they took such care to secure frequent parliamentary meetings—they thought this a much better security for the future than something “so mischievous in the consequences, as that of ‘cashiering their governors.’”
Burke continues to argue that the Revolutionary Society misunderstands history, and that the facts of history won’t support their aims. For example, the revolutionaries of 1688 saw James’s Catholicism as a threat to the state, as well as his absolutist attempts to impose his measures. These were more specific complaints than the catchall “misconduct.” They also sought to guard against future revolutions, not to set a precedent for them, Burke argues.
Themes
Burke next takes up the idea that kings are “the servants of the people.” In one sense, he says, this is undoubtedly true, since their goal is the general welfare of the people; however, kings are not servants in the sense that they are required to obey someone else; rather, all British subjects owe him obedience by law. Burke says that his ancestors had a “better remedy against arbitrary power than civil confusion,” like that produced by subjecting the king to his public’s authority.
Burke demonstrates how, in his view, the Revolution Society’s claims are far more radical than their language makes it appear on the surface. Their use of the term “servants,” for example, has a commonly acceptable meaning, but the meaning intended by the Revolution Society actually runs directly counter British law and the intentions of their forebears.
Themes
Burke points out that “cashiering kings” is something that can seldom be done without force—making it “a case of war, and not of constitution.” The Glorious Revolution of 1688 was a just war, dealing with out-of-the-ordinary abuses. Such an event should be “the very last resource of the thinking and the good.”
Burke argues that the revolutionaries’ arguments actually have more radical implications than they might seem—deposing a king is something that likely cannot be achieved without violence.
Themes
Get the entire Reflections on the Revolution in France LitChart as a printable PDF.
