Edmund Burke and Reason of State

David Armitage

doi:10.1353/jhi.2000.0033

Abstract

Edmund Burke has been one of the few political thinkers to be treated seriously by international theorists. 1 According to Martin Wight, one of the founders of the so-called "English School" of international theory, Burke was "[t]he only political philosopher who has turned wholly from political theory to international theory." 2 The resurgence of interest in Burke as an international theorist has not, however, generated any consensus about how he might be classified within the traditions of international theory. Wight variously divided thinkers into trichotomous schools of Realists, Rationalists, and Revolutionaries, Machiavellians, Grotians, and Kantians, or theorists of international anarchy, habitual intercourse, or moral solidarity; 3 more recent international theorists have refined or supplemented these categories to construct similar trinitarian traditions of Realism, Liberalism, and Socialism, and of Empirical Realism, Universal Moral Order, and Historical Reason. 4 Burke's place within any of these traditions remains uncertain. Debate over whether he was a realist or an idealist, a [End Page 617] Rationalist or a Revolutionist, has concluded variously that he was a "conservative crusader" or an "historical empiricist," a belated dualist or a Cold Warrior before the fact, or, most egregiously, "a proto-Marxist, or more precisely proto-Gramscian" theorist of hegemony. 5 The fact that Burke so obviously eludes definition may put in doubt the analytical utility of closely-defined "traditions" of international theory. 6

Highlights

EdmundBurkehasbeen one of the few politicalthinkersto be treatedseriouslyby internationatlheorists.Accordingto MartinWight,one of thefounders of the so-called"EnglishSchool"of internationatlheory,Burkewas "[t]heonly political philosopherwho has turnedwholly frompolitical theoryto internationaltheory."2The resurgenceof interestin Burkeas an internationaltheorist has not,generatedany consensus abouthow he might be classified within the traditionsof internationaltheory.Wightvariouslydivided thinkers into trichotomousschools of Realists, Rationalists,and Revolutionaries,Machiavellians,Grotians,andKantians,or theoristsof internationalanarchy,habitualintercourse,or moralsolidarity;3morerecentinternationatlheoristshave refinedor supplementedthese categoriesto constructsimilartrinitariantraditionsof Realism,Liberalism,andSocialism,andof EmpiricalRealism,Universal MoralOrder,andHistoricalReason.4Burke'splace withinany of these traditionsremainsuncertain.Debateoverwhetherhe was a realistoran idealist,a
It was in the context of the same late eighteenth-century wars that Kant and Bentham produced their respective plans for perpetual peace, each of whom attemptedto conceive cooperative, transparentinternationalnorms and institutions that would render such reason of state inoperable and obsolete.[72] Both questioned the Whiggishly self-congratulatory account of the Glorious Revolution on whose historical foundations Burke's theory rested, Kant because it exemplified both a "monstrous" appeal to "a right of necessity" (ius in casu necessitatis) and a tacit, standing right to rebellion without restriction, Bentham because he could not see it as beneficial for the interest of the nation (ratherthan to the "particularinterest of the aristocratical leaders in the revolution").73The Kantian categorical imperative and Bentham's greatest happiness principle provided competing but fatal alternatives to this tradition of reason of state; their anathematization of it opened up that gulf between morality andpolitics out of which Meinecke's instrumentalistaccount-and, almost everyone else's-emerged

Summary

Introduction

He charged that the Protestant Association's opposition to Catholic relief, which they "dignified by the name of reason of state, and security for constitutions and commonwealths" was a mere "receipt of policy, made up of a detestable compound of malice, cowardice, and sloth," and not a legitimate invocation of the principle.32Because the appeal to necessity was only justifiable for the benefit of the whole community and the preservation of society itself, the occasions on which it could legitimately be invoked had to be extraordinary and overmastering: as Burke argued consistently during the impeachment of Warren Hastings, it could not be raised into a regular principle of government.[33]

Results

Conclusion