I decided to read Thomas Paine's Rights of Man. I found it's rather like blogs. Paine's was a reply to Edmund Burke's Reflections on the Revolution in France, which in turn was a reply to Dr. Richard Price's
A Discourse on the Love of our Country. Rather fun to think a tradition is being carried on in blogging. A tradition which brought us the values we so admire and are fighting for. This is not the whole of the discourse. I cut from the beginning and the end. Anyone wanting to read the whole just follow the link. One thing though, they weren't short and concise in their writing. Ah well. The discourse beyond the fold. Happy reading.
The love of our country has in all times been a subject of warm commendations and it is certainly a noble passion, but, like all other passions, it requires regulation and direction. There are mistakes and prejudices by which, in this instance, we are in particular danger of being misled. I will briefly mention some of these to you and observe,
First, that by our country is meant, in this case, not the soil or the spot of earth on which we happen to have been born, not the forests and fields, but that community of which we are members, or that body of companions and friends and kindred who are associated with us under the same constitution of government, protected by the same laws, and bound together by the same civil polity.
Secondly, it is proper to observe that even in this sense of our country, that love of it which is our duty does not imply any conviction of the superior value of it to other countries, or any particular preference of its laws and constitution of government. Were this implied, the love of their country would be the duty of only a very small part of mankind, for there are few countries that enjoy the advantage of laws and governments which deserve to be preferred. To found, therefore, this duty on such a preference would be to found it on error and delusion. It is, however, a common delusion. There is the same partiality in countries to themselves that there is in individuals. All our attachments should be accompanied, as far as possible, with right opinions. We are too apt to confine wisdom and virtue within the circle of our own acquaintance and party. Our friends, our country, and, in short, every thing related to us we are disposed to overvalue. A wise man will guard himself against this delusion. He will study to think of all things as they are, and not suffer any partial affections to blind his understanding. In other families there may be as much worth as in our own. In other circles of friends there may be as much wisdom, and in other countries as much of all that deserves esteem, but, notwithstanding this, our obligation to love our own families, friends, and country, and to seek, in the first place, their good, will remain the same.
Thirdly, it is proper I should desire you particularly to distinguish between the love of our country and that spirit of rivalship and ambition which has been common among nations. What has the love of their country hitherto been among mankind? What has it been but a love of domination, a desire of conquest, and a thirst for grandeur and glory, by extending territory and enslaving surrounding countries? What has it been but a blind and narrow principle, producing in every country a contempt of other countries, and forming men into combinations and factions against their common rights and liberties? This is the principle that has been too often cried up as a virtue of the first rank: a principle of the same kind with that which governs clans of Indians or tribes of Arabs, and leads them to plunder and massacre. As most of the evils which have taken place in private life, and among individuals, have been occasioned by the desire of private interest overcoming the public affections, so most of the evils which have taken place among bodies of men have been occasioned by the desire of their own interest overcoming the principle of universal benevolence and leading them to attack one another's territories, to encroach on one another's rights, and to endeavour to build their own advancement on the degradation of all within the reach of their power. What was the love of their country among the Jews, but a wretched partiality to themselves and a proud contempt of all other nations? What was the love of their country among the old Romans? We have heard much of it, but I cannot hesitate in saying that however great it appeared in some of its exertions, it was in general no better than a principle holding together a band of robbers in their attempts to crush all liberty but their own. What is now the love of his country in a Spaniard, a Turk, or a Russian? Can it be considered as any thing better than a passion for slavery, or a blind attachment to a spot where he enjoys no rights and is disposed of as if he was a beast?
Let us learn by such reflexions to correct and purify this passion, and to make it a just and rational principle of action.
It is very remarkable that the founder of our religion has not once mentioned this duty or given us any recommendation of it, and this has, by unbelievers, been made an objection to Christianity. What I have said will entirely remove this objection. Certain it is, that by inculcating on men an attachment to their country, Christianity would at the time it was propagated have done unspeakably more harm than good. Among the Jews it would have been an excitement to war and insurrections, for they were then in eager expectation of becoming soon (as the favourite people of Heaven) the lords and conquerors of the earth under the triumphant reign of the Messiah. Among the Romans, likewise, this principle had, as I have just observed, exceeded its just bounds and rendered them enemies to the peace and happiness of mankind. By inculcating it, therefore, Christianity would have confirmed both Jews and Gentiles in one of the most pernicious faults. Our Lord and his apostles have done better. They have recommended that Universal Benevolence which is an unspeakably nobler principle than any partial affections. They have laid such stress on loving all men, even our enemies, and made an ardent and extensive charity so essential a part of virtue, that the religion they have preached may, by way of distinction from all other religions, be called the Religion of Benevolence. Nothing can be more friendly to the general rights of mankind, and were it duly regarded and practised, every man would consider every other man as his brother, and all the animosity that now takes place among contending nations would be abolished. If you want any proof of this, think of our Saviour's parable of the good Samaritan. The Jews and Samaritans were two rival nations that entertained a hatred of one another the most inveterate. The design of this parable was to shew a Jew that even a Samaritan and consequently all men of all nations and religions were included in the precept, Thou shall love thy neighbour as thyself.
But I am digressing from what I had chiefly in view, which was, after noticing that love of our country which is false and spurious, to explain the nature and effects of that which is just and reasonable. With this view I must desire you to recollect that we are so constituted that our affections are more drawn to some among mankind than to others, in proportion to their degrees of nearness to us, and our power of being useful to them. It is obvious that this is a circumstance in the constitution of our natures which proves the wisdom and goodness of our Maker, for had our affections been determined alike to all our fellow-creatures human life would have been a scene of embarrassment and distraction. Our regards, according to the order of nature, begin with ourselves, and every man is charged primarily with the care of himself. Next come our families, and benefactors, and friends, and after them our country. We can do little for the interest of mankind at large. To this interest, however, all other interests are subordinate. The noblest principle in our nature is the regard to general justice and that good-will which embraces all the world. I have already observed this, but it cannot be too often repeated. Though our immediate attention must be employed in promoting our own interest and that of our nearest connexions, yet we must remember that a narrower interest ought always to give way to a more extensive interest. In pursuing particularly the interest of our country we ought to carry our views beyond it. We should love it ardently but not exclusively. We ought to seek its good, by all the means that our different circumstances and abilities will allow, but at the same time we ought to consider ourselves as citizens of the world, and take care to maintain a just regard to the rights of other countries.
The enquiry by what means (subject to this limitation) we may best promote the interest of our country is very important, and all that remains of this discourse shall be employed in answering it and in exhorting you to manifest your love to your country by the means I shall mention.
The chief blessings of human nature are the three following: truth, virtue, and liberty. These are, therefore, the blessings in the possession of which the interest of our country lies, and to the attainment of which our love of it ought to direct our endeavours. By the diffusion of knowledge it must be distinguished from a country of barbarians: by the practice of religious virtue, it must be distinguished from a country of gamblers, atheists, and libertines: and by the possession of liberty, it must be distinguished from a country of slaves. I will dwell for a few moments on each of these heads.
Our first concern as lovers of our country must be to enlighten it. Why are the nations of the world so patient under despotism? Why do they crouch to tyrants, or submit to be treated as if they were a herd of cattle? Enlighten them and you will elevate them. Shew them they are men and they will act like men. Give them just ideas of civil government and let them know that it is an expedient for gaining protection against injury and defending their rights, and it will be impossible for them to submit to governments which, like most of those now in the world, are usurpations on the rights of men and little better than contrivances for enabling the few to oppress the many. Convince them that the Deity is a righteous and benevolent as well as omnipotent being, who regards with equal eye all his creatures and connects his favour with nothing but an honest desire to know and to do his will, and that zeal for mystical doctrines which has led men to hate and harass one another will be exterminated. Set religion before them as a rational service consisting not in any rites and ceremonies, but in worshipping God with a pure heart and practising righteousness from the fear of his displeasure and the apprehension of a future righteous judgment and that gloomy and cruel superstition will be abolished which has hitherto gone under the name of religion, and to the support of which civil government has been perverted. Ignorance is the parent of bigotry, intolerance, persecution and slavery. Inform and instruct mankind, and these evils will be excluded. Happy is the person who, himself raised above vulgar errors, is conscious of having aimed at giving mankind this instruction. Happy is the scholar or philosopher who at the close of life can reflect that he has made this use of his learning and abilities, but happier far must he be if, at the same time, he has reason to believe he has been successful and actually contributed by his instructions to disseminate among his fellow-creatures just notions of themselves, of their rights, of religion, and the nature and end of civil government. Such were Milton, Locke, Sidney, Hoadly, etc. in this country, such were Montesquieu, Fenelon, Turgot, etc. in France. They sowed a seed which has since taken root and is now growing up to a glorious harvest. To the information they conveyed by their writings we owe those revolutions in which every friend to mankind is now exulting. What an encouragement is this to us all in our endeavours to enlighten the world? Every degree of illumination which we can communicate must do the greatest good. It helps to prepare the minds of men for the recovery of their rights, and hastens the overthrow of priestcraft and tyranny. In short, we may, in this instance, learn our duty from the conduct of the oppressors of the world. They know that light is hostile to them, and therefore they labour to keep men in the dark. With this intention they have appointed licensers of the press, and, in Popish countries, prohibited the reading of the Bible. Remove the darkness in which they envelope the world and their usurpations will be exposed, their power will be subverted, and the world emancipated.
The next great blessing of human nature which I have mentioned is virtue. This ought to follow knowledge and to be directed by it. Virtue without knowledge makes enthusiasts and knowledge without virtue makes devils, but both united elevates to the top of human dignity and perfection. We must, therefore, if we would serve our country, make both these the objects of our zeal. We must discourage vice in all its forms, and our endeavours to enlighten must have ultimately in view a reformation of manners and virtuous practice.
I must add here that in the practice of virtue I include the discharge of the public duties of religion. By neglecting these we may injure our country essentially. But it is melancholy to observe that it is a common neglect among us and in a great measure owing to a cause which is not likely to be soon removed: I mean, the defects (may I not say, the absurdities?) in our established codes of faith and worship. In foreign countries, the higher ranks of men, not distinguishing between the religion they see established and the Christian religion, are generally driven to irreligion and infidelity. The like evil is produced by the like cause in this country, and if no reformation of our established formularies can be brought about, it must be expected that religion will go on to lose its credit, and that little of it will be left except among the lower orders of people, many of whom, while their superiors give up all religion, are sinking into an enthusiasm in religion lately revived, and mistaking, as the world has generally done, the service acceptable to God for a system of faith souring the temper, and a service of forms supplanting morality.
I hope you will not mistake what I am now saying, or consider it as the effect of my prejudices as a Dissenter from the established church. The complaint I am making, is the complaint of many of the wisest and best men in the established church itself, who have long been urging the necessity of a revival of its Liturgy and Articles. These were framed above two centuries ago when Christendom was just emerging from the ignorance and barbarity of the dark ages. They remain now much the same as they were then and, therefore, cannot be properly adapted to the good sense and liberality of the present times. This imperfection, however, in our public forms of worship, affords no excuse to any person for neglecting public worship. All communities will have some religion, and it is of infinite consequence that they should be led to that which, by enforcing the obligations of virtue and putting men upon loving instead of damning one another, is most favourable to the interest of society.
If there is a Governor of the world who directs all events, he ought to be invoked and worshipped, and those who dislike that mode of worship which is prescribed by public authority ought (if they can find no worship out of the church which they approve) to set up a separate worship for themselves, and by doing this and giving an example of a rational and manly worship, men of weight, from their rank or literature, may do the greatest service to society and the world. They may bear a testimony against that application of civil power to the support of particular modes of faith which obstructs human improvement and perpetuates error, and they may hold out an instruction which will discountenance superstition, and at the same time recommend religion by making it appear to be (what it certainly is when rightly understood) the strongest incentive to all that is generous and worthy, and, consequently, the best friend to public order and happiness.
Liberty is the next great blessing which I have mentioned as the object of patriotic zeal. It is inseparable from knowledge and virtue and together with them completes the glory of a community. An enlightened and virtuous country must be a free country. It cannot suffer invasions of its rights, or bend to tyrants. I need not, on this occasion, take any pains to shew you how great a blessing liberty is. The smallest attention to the history of past ages and the present state of mankind, will make you sensible of its importance. Look round the world and you will find almost every country, respectable or contemptible, happy or miserable, a fruitful field or a frightful waste, according as it possesses or wants this blessing. Think of Greece, formerly the seat of arts and science and the most distinguished spot under heaven, but now, having lost liberty, a vile and wretched spot, a region of darkness, poverty, and barbarity. Such reflexions must convince you that if you love your country you cannot be zealous enough in promoting the cause of liberty in it. But it will come in my way to say more to this purpose presently.
The observations I have made include our whole duty to our country, for by endeavouring to liberalize and enlighten it, to discourage vice and to promote virtue in it, and to assert and support its liberties, we shall endeavour to do all that is necessary to make it great and happy. But it is proper that, on this occasion, I should be more explicit and exemplify our duty to our country by observing farmer that it requires us to obey its laws and to respect its magistrates.
Civil government (as I have before observed) is an institution of human prudence for guarding our persons, our property, and our good name, against invasion, and for securing to the members of a community that liberty to which all have an equal right, as far as they do not, by any overt act, use it to injure the liberty of others. Civil laws are regulations agreed upon by the community for gaining these ends, and civil magistrates are officers appointed by the community for executing these laws. Obedience, therefore, to the laws and to magistrates is a necessary expression of our regard to the community. Without it a community must fall into a state of anarchy that will destroy those rights and subvert that liberty which it is the end of government to protect.
I wish it was in my power to give you a just account of the importance of this observation. It shews the ground on which the duty of obeying civil governors stands, and that there are two extremes in this case which ought to be avoided. These extremes are adulation and servility on one hand, and a proud and licentious contempt on the other. The former is the extreme to which mankind in general have been most prone, for it has oftener happened that men have been too passive than too unruly, and the rebellion of Kings against their people has been more common and done more mischief than the rebellion of people against their Kings.
Adulation is always odious and when offered to men in power it corrupts them by giving them improper ideas of their situation, and it debases those who offer it by manifesting an abjectness founded on improper ideas of themselves. I have lately observed in this kingdom too near approaches to this abjectness. In our late addresses to the King on his recovery from the severe illness with which God has been pleased to afflict him, we have appeared more like a herd crawling at the feet of a master than like enlightened and manly citizens rejoicing with a beloved sovereign, but at the same time conscious that he derives all his consequence from themselves. But, perhaps, these servilities in the language of our late addresses should be pardoned as only forms of civility and expressions of an overflow of good nature. They have, however, a dangerous tendency. The potentates of this world are sufficiently apt to consider themselves as possessed of an inherent superiority which gives them a right to govern and makes mankind their own; and this infatuation is almost every where fostered in them by the creeping sycophants about them and the language of flattery which they are continually hearing.
Civil governors are properly the servants of the public and a King is no more than the first servant of the public, created by it, maintained by it, and responsible to it; and all the homage paid him is due to him on no other account than his relation to the public. His sacredness is the sacredness of the community. His authority is the authority of the community, and the term Majesty, which it is usual to apply to him, is by no means his own majesty, but the majesty of the people. For this reason, whatever he may be in his private capacity and though, in respect of personal qualities, not equal to or even far below many among ourselves -- for this reason I say (that is, as representing the community and its first magistrate) he is entitled to our reverence and obedience. The words Most Excellent Majesty are rightly applied to him and there is a respect which it would be criminal to withhold from him.
You cannot be too attentive to this observation. The improvement of the world depends on the attention to it: nor will mankind be ever as virtuous and happy as they are capable of being till the attention to it becomes universal and efficacious. If we forget it we shall be in danger of an idolatry as gross and stupid as that of the ancient heathens, who, after fabricating blocks of wood and stone, fell down and worshipped them. The disposition in mankind to this kind of idolatry is indeed a very mortifying subject of reflexion. In Turkey, millions of human beings adore a silly mortal and are ready to throw themselves at his feet and to submit their lives to his discretion. In Russia, the common people are only a stock on the lands of grandees or appendages to their estates, which, like the fixtures in a house, are bought and sold with the estates. In Spain, in Germany, and under most of the governments of the world, mankind are in a similar state of humiliation. Who, that has a just sense of the dignity of his nature, can avoid execrating such a debasement of it?
Had I been to address the King on a late occasion, I should have been inclined to do it in a style very different from that of most of the addressers, and to use some such language as the following:
I rejoice, Sir, in your recovery. I thank God for his goodness to you. I honour you not only as my King, but as almost the only lawful King in the world, because the only one who owes his crown to the choice of the people. May you enjoy all possible happiness. May God shew you the folly of those effusions of adulation which you are now receiving, and guard you against their effects. May you be led to such a sense of the nature of your situation and endowed with such wisdom as shall render your restoration to the government of these kingdoms a blessing to it, and engage you to consider yourself as more properly the servant than the sovereign of your people.
But I must not forget the opposite extreme to that now taken notice of, that is, a disdainful pride derived from a consciousness of equality, or, perhaps, superiority in respect of all that gives true dignity to men in power and producing a contempt of them, and a disposition to treat them with rudeness and insult. It is a trite observation, that extremes generally beget one another. This is particularly true in the present case. Persons justly informed on the subject of government, when they see men dazzled by looking up to high stations and observe loyalty carried to a length that implies ignorance and servility, such persons, in such circumstances, are in danger of spuming at all public authority and throwing off that respectful demeanour to persons invested with it which the order of society requires. There is undoubtedly a particular deference and homage due to civil magistrates on account of their stations and offices; nor can that man be either truly wise or truly virtuous who despises governments and wantonly speaks evil of his rulers, or who does not, by all the means in his power, endeavour to strengthen their hands and to give weight to their exertions in the discharge of their duty. Fear God says St. Peter, Love the brotherhood. Honour all men. Honour the King. You must needs, says St. Paul, be subject to rulers, not only for wrath (that is, from the fear of suffering the penalties annexed to the breach of the laws) but for conscience sake. For rulers are ministers of God, and revengers for executing wrath on all that do evil.
Another expression of our love to our country is defending it against enemies. These enemies are of two sorts; internal and external, or domestic and foreign. The former are the most dangerous, and they have generally been the most successful. I have just observed that there is a submission due to the executive officers of a government which is our duty, but you must not forget what I have also observed that it must not be a blind and slavish submission. Men in power (unless better disposed than is common) are always endeavouring to extend their power. They hate the doctrine that it is a trust derived from the people and not a right vested in themselves. For this reason the tendency of every government is to despotism, and in this the best constituted governments must end, if the people are not vigilant, ready to take alarms, and determined to resist abuses as soon as they begin. This vigilance, therefore, it is our duty to maintain. Whenever it is withdrawn and a people cease to reason about their rights and to be awake to encroachments, they are in danger of being enslaved and their servants will soon become their masters.
I need not say how much it is our duty to defend our country against foreign enemies. When a country is attacked in any of its rights by another country, or when any attempts are made by ambitious foreign powers to injure it, a war in its defence becomes necessary: and, in such circumstances, to die for our country is meritorious and noble. These defensive wars are, in my opinion, the only just wars. Offensive wars are always unlawful and to seek the aggrandizement of our country by them, that is, by attacking other countries in order to extend dominion, or to gratify avarice, is wicked and detestable. Such, however, have been most of the wars which have taken place in the world, but the time is, I hope, coming when a conviction will prevail of the folly[22] as well as the iniquity of wars, and when the nations of the earth, happy under just governments, and no longer in danger from the passions of kings, will find out better ways of settling their disputes, and beat (as Isaiah prophecies) their swords into ploughshares and their spears into pruning-hooks.