Was Burke Really A Conservatism?
'at once to preserve and reform' was Burke's motto (Honderich 1990 p. 1-5)Edmund burke (1729-1797) was a British statesman who laid the foundation for conservative political thought. Conservatism evolved as a reaction to the French revolution with disapproval, shock and resistance. When his reflections on the French revolution was published it raged debates about the nature of his conservatism as some believed his principles to be utilitarian while some see him as a proponent of natural law. According to Strauss, Burke's thoughts were modern and Lockean while others believed it to be classical or Christian. Burke really didn't have a theory it was rather an outlook (Radasanu 2011 p.16). He saw life, liberty and property as an essential component for acquiring temporal happiness. Burke criticised the violence and radical instability caused during revolutions which made him oppose the French revolution. He saw it as an appeal to universal abstract principles and sought to overthrow traditional authorities. He believed that the American colonies were trying to protect their traditional rights and liberties and supported them. He was not against change but accepted it when done slow. Alterations were accepted to an extend involving unfamiliarity whereas reform is a direct application to the grievances. And change 'alters the substance of the objects themselves and gets rid of all the essential goods as well as accidental evil annexed to them'.
Burke was a leading theorist in his day and was known as the father of modern conservatism, he was a protestant himself and battled discrimination against Irish Catholics throughout his life. He favoured an established church, yet mulled over a level of religious toleration. The revolutionaries saw Christianity as their enemy for it supports conservatism of traditions but to Burke it was 'man greatest good and established order to be the fundamental of civilisation'. Thought there was individual domination but his studies provided the basic foundation of established society.. He was a monarchist and considered innate government justified as an indispensable part of a constitution that was completely in view of the rule legacy and historically served the people well. He later compared it with the rights of men inherited to them naturally. Burke legitimized communal change if done in accordance with the historical conventions: tradition represented the sagacity of the species and he valued group and social agreements over social changes. Burke had catholic connections and a critique of French revolution. He viewed imperialism as bad, radicalism as unsafe and majority rules system as a threat to social security, he believed that the state should be governed by the rich, cultured and privileged people who would not fall into a pit of greed and can easily resist corruption and saw society as a contract between God and man. Burke himself argues, 'the dissenting habit of mind is one unfit for civilized society, while catholic habits of discipline render them excellent civil subjects'. He insisted on standards of honour derived from the medieval noble convention and viewed the privileged as the country's accustomed pioneers, that implied restraints on the powers of the Crown, since he observed the institutions of Parliament to be better informed than commissions designed by the official. His core ideas were partialism, epistemology, counter revolutionary and a kind of conservatism. Burke had a profound admiration for custom and convention, a severe dislike of philosophy and people who supported political reform and a faith in the politics and judged policies. His reference to providence provides another insight to Burke's conservatism, 'the principles of true politics are those of morality enlarged' (Honderich 1990) The basic political principles were based on ancient classical and Christian moral natural law derived from God and perceived by all uncorrupted men through right reason and transmitted from generations to generations, it was an important part of burke's philosophy (Segal 2012 p. 261-263) He did not really supported enlightenment for it would change everything and traditions gradually set aside, whereas he wanted change to be gradual and traditions inherited in the social institutions of the society.
The French revolution was about rebuilding and getting rid of the asking regime. The revolutionist refused to reform anything and left nothing unchanged. 'declaring war on landed property, religion as well as the monarchy, the Jacobins assaulted the three pillars of the aristocratic regimes of the European community' (Honderich 1990 p. 6). He saw it as a usurpation by mobs and unrooted intellectuals against tradition and hence against liberty', which caused anarchy and destroyed everything @. Burke predicted the consequences of the revolution and criticized it as being different from the other revolutions, which does change things but preserves the nation's ancient institutions. 'Our business is impeded, our reaction is troubled our pleasures are saddened, our very studies are poisoned and perverted, and knowledge is rendered worse than ignorance, by the enormous evil of this dreadful innovation' (Spinner 1991 p. 395-410). Burke's reaction to the French revolution was slow but as the events started taking places, basically the confiscation of church property, opened his eyes on how radicle was the French revolution. Burke is afraid that the English will be polluted by the 'Jacobin evil' and will eventually become accustomed to it where the young minds are degraded by pleasure and 'form them to crimes'. Then he wrote the reflection in which he also predicted that the republican experiment would lead to 'democratic despotism' (Honderich 1990 p. 4-9) He insisted that changes regarding liberty must be done slow. 'the restraints on men as well as their liberties are to be reckoned among their rights.' He said that changes in politics should be done slow and on secured foundations of old and natural loyalties and settlements. He identifies liberties and rights with landed property. By constitution he meant not the formal governmental structure but the entire social structure of England. He said, 'no people had the right to overturn such a structure at pleasure and on a speculation that by doing so they might make things better'. Any change that affects others must be proved by others as well. In burke's view recorded and positive rights were better since they have been interpreted, nuanced and given without any doubt the modes of protection through long historical experience. Following rights written in theory rather than the inherited rights can often give rise to the diverse beliefs of the society than can tear them apart. He believes that the first privilege of men were not unreal but rather irrelevant to the society. Burke was concerned with England and saw both the American and the French revolution from the view point of England. Burke supported the American revolution and saw it as a mere reform, 'a fight not for new-fangled innovations but for traditional rights against the royal usurpation'. He sees the ancient order of all of Europe at stake in the war with France, 'it is not a war for Louis the Eighteen, or even for the property, virtue, fidelity of France. It is a war for George the thirst, France the second and for the dignity, property, honour, virtue and religion of England, of Germany and of all nations' (Spinner 1991 p. 395-396). Arguing that France and England are a part of the European community where nations are tied together not by being geographically close to each other but by traditions and customs, and when one breaks these customs the stability of the whole citizenry is endangered. Where a change in one nation affects the others the law of neighbourhood is applied which means 'one is not perfectly master on his own grounds'. 'the most important thing is if we intervene and change, what we expect is very unlikely to happen'. The French unrest, he said was 'metaphysical madness' based upon a terrible misconception of human instinct. He was not against change he was against war. they infest us in towns; they pursue to the country.
In the eighteenth century an attempt was made to improve the human condition through change in politics and established organizations by the Europeans. they intend to set up moral and political principles that were based historical conventions, a 'universal ethics independent of historically contingent tradition'. The revolution in France gave intense articulation to this viewpoint, rapidly augmented by mechanical insurgency and development of private enterprise. He upheld the American Revolution of 1765-1783 but abhorred the violence of the French Revolution (1789-1799). He was against the French revolution because of radical change, dissolution of government, political instability and violence.). He acknowledged the liberal ideals of private property and the economics of Adam Smith (1723-1790) yet felt that economics should remain subordinate to the medieval social ethic, that capitalism should be subordinate to the medieval social tradition and that the business class should be subordinate to aristocracy. Burke contended that a nation's institutions, traditions and values were the long-term result of its experiences throughout the hundreds of years, as little modifications were made to fit changing needs and the cumulative impact was the current society he contended that present spectators were probably not going to completely welcome the shrouded diamonds of shrewdness of the "antiquated constitution"; efforts to impose radical changes based on visions rather than experience, for example the French Revolution, were subsequently bound to disappointment. He said that social and political order should be conserved as its god given and delicate. He tempered his conservative views by advocating some of the basic principles of liberalism-religious tolerance, a believe on the possibility of upward mobility and the importance of colonial powers respecting native traditions. Burke remarks that antiquarians have misinterpreted burke's enlightenment opposition to doctrinaire attacks on organized religion for a counter-enlightenment crusade… encouraged by a secular teleology (that reduces) enlightenment to the criticism of religion… burke's espousal of skeptical Whiggism and protestant toleration is curiously reinterpreted as hostile to the very principles of enlightenment he was in fact defending'. Along these lines the regular suspicion that conservatism rejects innovation is addressed by Scruton, for whom it 'is itself an innovation… (that wants) to live completely in the present to comprehend it in all flaws'. He mistrusted change and respected tradition. His Catholicism supported a less liberal thought though he defended private and corporate property as the necessary condition for maintaining freedom in the society. His writings and speeches are not sufficient to demonstrate him as a liberal. His writings and speeches are not sufficient to demonstrate him as a liberal. He can be called classic conservative.
Burke believed that the revolutionists had unrealistic schemes for human perfectibility, for their theory was based on political practice rather they should derive theory from it. He predicted the terror of the French revolution after three years. Burke contrasts from liberal convention not in rejecting rights as such but rather in his conception of them. He rejected a constitution or bill of rights that does not simply express existing practice. Thus, Burke's conservatism can be called modern as it holds that the real rights of men are rooted in custom, tradition and faith and believes that things should not be changed completely as it causes harm to old traditions, but reform should be done as and when needed. The philosophy that liberalism holds is rejected by Burke and communism is hypothetically complex according to a conservative theory. Burke was not clearly a liberal or a conservative rather his outlook stood up for conservatism and partly liberalism. 
Bibliography
Burke, E. & Mitchell, L.G., 2009. Reflections on the Revolution in France / Edmund Burke ; edited with an introduction and notes by L.G. Mitchell. New ed.]., New York ; Oxford.
Honderich, T., 1991. Conservatism / Ted Honderich., London, pp.1-12.
Jones, E.M.I.L.Y., 2015. CONSERVATISM, EDMUND BURKE, AND THE INVENTION OF A POLITICAL TRADITION, c. 1885-1914 *., 58(4), pp.1115-1139.
S, Jacob., 2012. The Reactionary Mind: Conservatism from Edmund Burke to Sarah Palin, New Political Science, 34:2, 261-263
Radasanu, A., 2011. The Modern Foundations of Burke's Conservatism. Perspectives on Political Science, 40(1), pp.16-26.
Robin, C., 2011. The reactionary mind: conservatism from Edmund Burke to Sarah Palin / Corey Robin., New York.
Spinner, J., 1991. CONSTRUCTING COMMUNITIES – BURKE, EDMUND ON REVOLUTION. Polity, 23(3), pp.395-421.
Viereck, P., 1965. Conservatism revisited / Peter Viereck. Rev. and enl. ed., with the addition of Book II, The new conservatism: what went wrong?, New York.