An Analysis Of Edmund Burke's Parlement Of Paris

492 Words2 Pages
Edmund Burke discloses his reluctance to change in his Thoughts on the Cause of the Present Discontents, by arguing the previous government structure outdoes the current one. Specifically, from the Glorious Revolution in 1688 throughout the reign of George II of Hanover (House of Brunswick as stated by Burke), personal ties and private connections governed the country in what Burke called “the most fortunate periods of our history” (Burke 529). At the same time, the Parlement of Paris also exhibits objection to the current policies of the government as it outlines oppositions to the new tax within the framework of the Remonstrance against the Edict Suppressing Obligatory Labor. Although both parties argue against reforms and changes taking place in the country and believe in the power of the upper class and nobility, Edmund Burke proves more reluctant to change through his complete dismissal of reforms, compared to the Parlement of Paris and their insistence on implementation of new strategies.…show more content…
Although proposing these ideas, he immediately rejects them, disregarding any sign of change to improve the country’s government. If this does not only show his reluctance to change, he furthers his claim by stating the only way to fix the government would be to do nothing. This “nothing” he proposes, simply means the foundation of the government and the constitutions stands as the best structure to run the country, “a nice equipoise, with steep prejudices and deep waters upon all sides of it” (521). Edmund Burke strongly believes in the right to a blood lineage running the country, ones who consider the entire nation a family. Lastly, his reluctance to change is shown through his exclamation of a revolution; if the government changes, the people have a right to
Open Document