Book: Reflections on the revolution in France

Tarnish as soon as you overthrow the government, they put the argument, respectively, which all who opposed the new government and its abuses, were enlisted in a mandatory supporters of the old regime; and those who accused them of cruelty and violence over freedom, were declared the Champions of slavery.

Society is indeed a contract, but the contract of the highest order. It cannot be considered as a commercial agreement on the sale of pepper, coffee and tobacco or any similar contract of the practical benefits or for the implementation of minor, fleeting interests, which may be terminated at the whim of one party. The state demands respect, because it is a merger whose purpose is not the satisfaction of animal needs or solution is negligible and transient problems. This society, which should develop science and the arts, all virtues and perfection. Such a goal can only be achieved by many successive generations therefore the social contract is not only between living, but between present, past and future generations.

Every nation must have a system of morals, which would be nice mind. If you want to force us to love their country, make it sweet to our heart. But any government, depreciated manners and customs, will look for means to resist. The usurpation which, in order to break the old institutions of power, destroyed the old principles, will try to resist, using the same methods by which she reached power.

Human nature is complicated and confusing, the public interest is also extremely complex, and, therefore, there is no political direction, no such power that would suit everyone. When I hear about the simplicity of the plan, the purpose of which is a new political organization, I can't help thinking that its inventors don't know their craft or neglect of duty. The idea is simple political system is inherently flawed, to say the least.

The state needs to strengthen its forces in the cure of their diseases. Neither gives a discussion about human rights. What is the benefit if it does not provide a man nor food nor medical care? The problem is how to get them and how to dispose of them. In such cases I always advise to seek the services of a farmer or a doctor, not a Professor of metaphysics.

The government is not to protect the natural rights of man, which can and do exist independently of him, keeping his in the highest degree of abstract perfection; but it is the abstract perfection is their practical defect. Having a right to everything, men want everything. The state is a wise invention of humanity intended to promote human desires. People have a right to this wisdom was directed to meet their needs. But the state requires that they restrain their passions and desires.

Woe to the country which is doomed to the darkness of everything that can give it a Shine and glory. And Woe to the country that rushes to the other extreme, believing that to control low education, narrow views and habits of manual labor. All vocations should be open to all people, but the choice is necessary. It is impossible to govern at a time or on occasion. Each person has a job to do, which he knows. I do not hesitate to say that the path from obscurity to respect and power should not be too easy. Rare dignity are rare, and they need to pass the test. Castle of honor is better to build on a hill. As for the virtues, let me remind You that it is always tested in difficulties and constancy.

But "fools law does not apply". In this situation, when power is limitless, and its goals are undefined and indefinable, the ubiquity of moral evil, and an almost physical inability of people in positions of authority, to perform their duties may be the cause of terrible turmoil.

Success has determined the punishment. Subverted the laws, the courts are dispersed, powerless industry, the dying trade, unpaid debts, the people, impoverished, plundered the Church, the army and civil society in a state of anarchy, anarchy, a state device, each human and the creation of God, sacrificed to the idol of public trust, and as a result - national bankruptcy.

Respecting your forefathers, you will learn to respect themselves. You stop to consider the French as a nation, which was born and remained in slavery until 1789. Then it would have increased the price of your honor, your crimes would be forgiven, and you were hardly satisfied with what you represent as a gang of runaway slaves, suddenly escaped from serfdom, and would be worthy of liberty, which was abused, because not used to it.

To determine the severity of the disease, you need wisdom, are able to separate high thoughts against the abuse of power, caught up in unworthy hands, the arrogance and audacity from the commitment of noble risk. But in any case, revolution is the last resource of reason and goodness.

Flattery is equally corrupting of a smoothie and the one she designed; low flattery does not benefit neither the people nor kings. That's why I'll refrain from congratulating France with newfound freedom, until I know how the new situation is reflected in social forces; government; discipline in the army; on the collection and equitable distribution of income; on morality and religion. Those are all great things, and without them, freedom can not be a blessing. The value of freedom for every individual is that he can do as he likes: we need to understand what they like before you send congratulations, which may soon turn into sympathy.

Abstractly speaking, hard power is as good as freedom; but could I, being of sound mind, ten years ago to congratulate France because it was satisfied with its government, not understanding, what is the nature of this government or what methods it manages? Do I have to congratulate the country with the exemption only because the abstract freedom can be attributed to the good for mankind? Do I have to seriously congratulate the madman who escaped from behind the madhouse and wholesome darkness of his room only because he again had the opportunity to use the light and freedom? Should I congratulate the murderer or the Highwayman, break the shackles of prison, after gaining their natural rights? It would be like the episode of the liberation of criminals sentenced to the galleys, the heroic philosopher - Knight of the Sorrowful countenance.