The identity of a society is verified through the rights which are given to the citizens. The rights of man have been at many different standards throughout time. Often being very one sided, and at times striving for a median between the two sides. In Edmund Burke’s essay Reflections on the Revolution in France Burke states that a king is in one sense a servant but in everyday situations they are above every individual. All persons under him owe him a legal agreement to serve his hopes. This essay will demonstrate why Thomas Paine’s essay The Rights of Man is more convincing than Edmund Burke’s through examination of a heredity government, the nature of rights and the uselessness of the monarchy.Edmund Burke’s idea of heredity government infuriated Thomas Paine. Paine apposes this position by saying that the king had no more authority to pass a law demanding that his heir live forever than it was acceptable to make laws which were forever required. The heir leadership should not be determined by heredity, but should be based upon their effectiveness to serve the state, which in return is beneficial to the citizens. This infringes, in my mind, the rights to be self-regulating and the desire to have opinions in decisions of the state. All individuals of the state should have say in selecting an individual to represent him and everyone else. Paine states that rights by nature cannot be granted. He supports this by saying that if rights are granted then they can be revoked, and if they can be revoked then they can be considered privileges, not rights. He claims that they should not be an agreement between the living and the dead, but the sole benefit of the entire constituent of these two groups. This is a very good argument on Paine’s behalf. For if rights leaned to the deceased side then the living will be sold short on what they are deserved. On the other hand, if it supported the ot...
