Natural Society Against Government
Can political society justify the powers it exercises over those who must obey it? The answer determines whether government protects liberty or converts authority, taxation, and coercion into organized oppression.
Writing in 1756, Burke presents political institutions as an accumulation of restraints rather than a natural remedy for human conflict. Government demands obedience, raises taxes, claims sovereignty, and can turn its authority toward war and tyranny; its legitimacy therefore cannot rest on power alone. By setting this burden against the relative simplicity of natural society, the argument attacks the assumption that established governance deserves automatic loyalty and leaves political strategy answerable to liberty.
- liberty
- coercion
- sovereignty
- tyranny
- justice
- war
- human nature
- political violence
- despotism
- democracy
Enter a dialogue
- Your sceptical noble lord argues that if natural religion needs no revelation, political laws are needless. Why does an attack on religion work against the state?
- In nature, your narrator says, gains follow labour, but in organised society those who labour most enjoy the least. What would life without government change for a miner?
- Your narrator calls his old faith in a balanced constitution, blending kingship, nobles and people, a 'darling mistake'. Why would mixing the three forms not cure their faults?
- A lawsuit over who owns a farm, says your narrator, is settled by forms of words, not evidence of right. What does that share with religious ritual?
- Natural society, in your narrator's picture, rests on appetite and instinct, with no institutions. What keeps people there from preying on one another?