Burke's major argument in Reflections on the French Revolution is that the rebels had acted rashly, and that they destroyed the government without any proven method to replace it. He thought that the revolutionaries were egotistical in believing that they could abolish the existing system and establish a new one based only on their theories of what would work. The institutions that they had in place were ancient; passed down from their forefathers. He thought that tradition and inherited wisdom was practical, and that the “mild and lawful” king was a victim of misguided anger. He was in favor of gradual change and not revolution. (pg 40) In Rights of Man, Paine defends against Burke's condemnation of the French Revolution. His main argument is that citizens have a right to revolt and revolution if the leadership or rulers of their country are not looking out for their best interests. He also viewed rulers who inherited their power through their bloodline as illegitimate. He argued that human rights belong to every man equally through nature, as a result of them simply being human. He championed democratic systems since he believed that all people should have a say in the matters of their own life.
2. In Reflections on the French revolution, Burke's appeal to ethos in the for of an ad hominem attack against the…show more content… Paine doesn't just criticize the cause of Burke, he wholeheartedly attacks the man himself, as well as his rhetorical techniques. One of my favorite criticisms is when he writes “that men should take up arms, and spend their lives and fortunes, not to maintain their rights, but to maintain they have not rights, is an entirely new species of discovery, and suited to the paradoxical genius of Mr. Burke.” He paints Burke's views that men would take up arms and fight wars for a leader who has deprived them of their rights as absolutely
