My friends use to call me a burke. Now I am not so offended.......

Love the quote about Marie Antoinette who was truly an amazing woman. She never said “Let them eat cake” that’s lib fake news. In fact her last words were to her executioner who she apologized to for accidentally stepping on his shoes. A lady until the very end. May God grant her eternal rest.

Hi, I love this book club. Could Michael knowles do classics more please like Dostoevsky and invite Jordan Peterson 😂, but all seriousness I love Michael n the guests talk about classic literature either they're fictions of philosophy books. Please do more of that. Thanks ♡♡♡

As a Pole, I believe in God, Honour and Country!

A fantastic book to help understand Burke a bit more (at least for me) is "Edmund Burke and the Natural Law" by Peter J. Stanlis. It made a number of things sharp for me, that were previously somewhat vague, even after having read Burke himself and authors like Scruton.

I have the Penguin Classics version. I am amazed at how long the letter was. Burkes insights and intuition on were the revolution was going was impressive.

I’m ten yrs his senior but someday I hope to be half as well dressed as Michael Knowles

Great summary! I’m only now discovering Burke’s writings after many years wrestling with Locke, Smith and Hume.

Brits, where are you? Take a bow, we salute you!

This guy has nine kids? wow, that's a real conservative!

Great episode

Great timeless stuff 👏👏

As a French, I wish my country would've stayed a Monarchy...

Liberty and Freedom are unfortunately very different. French founders think of liberty as unbounded freedom. George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and Jonathan Edwards (ironically) knew real LIBERTY is freedom based on self regulation. 🙂

And people get mad nowadays when you text a two or three paragraph “essay” as a reply; imagine asking a question and getting a book assignment back in the mail 😂

illuminating

*_Equality!_* The distinction is in the *_AIM!_* To what do you apply the principle of equality? It is certainly *_not_* to outcomes. And it is certainly not in our application of humility, for, while everyone deserves our humility to their needs, we are required to use wisdom in the application of that humility. For example, we can turn the other cheek to give to someone else who needs to strike us the generous opportunity to accomplish their emotional desire, but if that other requires of us to commit some crime, we will not participate, for we hold a higher humility to God on the things which belong to Him. The commandment to honor our father and mother come from this spiritual logic, even if a parent has fallen into sin and decadence. How we honor them is a matter of wisdom.

Great vid! I read this book and it is a "must read" oeuvre. Do you guys have any book suggestions to give about the russian revolution? Everything I remember reading was pretty biased.

Very good, thank you

People have no natural right to a thing if others must be coerced to provide that thing. That’s another of Burkes ideas.

👏👏👏

May Paine's vision live on till the end of days

28:30 ⭐️ feeling matter, but if untamed, can be gaurdrails

Adam Smith also started with observation of reality

Interesting analysis, *_but it misses what is perhaps a far greater force involved._* I know this is a book report, but Burke, as brilliant as he was, would likely have been humbled by the insights of Thomas Sowell in analyzing the difference between the American and French revolutions. His insights reveal something far more pervasive and basic described quite well in his book, *_A Conflict of Visions._* The more potent source of insanity is behind many of the tragedies of history. * Derailing of science by the Ancient Greeks. * Derailing of Christianity by church scholars in the 4th century, trying to be more like the arrogant Greeks. * Derailing of modern America by the "progressives." * Derailing of modern science by those in science who have lost touch with the attitudes which had made science great 4 centuries earlier. This more potent ingredient is the *_know-it-all attitude_* of the Intelligentsia, versus the *_humility_* of early Renaissance Christians to empirical evidence. America's Founding Fathers had the humility to know that man has a huge penchant for evil. So, it wasn't so much humility to tradition, for America's Founding Fathers were lucky their tradition wasn't that of Imperial Russia or China. Their brilliance was in realizing that man could not be trusted with power. And they looked to the British system because they knew that parts of it actually worked. REFERENCES: *_"Overview of America,"_* JBS video [the real Left-Right paradigm] *_"Myths vs. Facts,"_* JBS video series [how we got the Deep State and a crazy government] *_Intellectuals and Society,_* 2nd ed., by Thomas Sowell *_A Conflict of Visions,_* by Thomas Sowell *_Dumb Genius: How intelligence is sometimes its own worst enemy_* (hardcover, paperback, ebook)

A matter of principle (of basic policy) had already divided Burke and Fox before (before) the French Revolution - what was this matter Sir? Do you know? This is not a trick question, And, it should not be a difficult question Sir.

15:00

Edmund Burke is a classical liberal according to F. A. Hayek. Look up his essay "why I am not a conservative."

Welcome back to the show Laura's heart who says very proud to be Italian right now funny how nobody on the left will congratulate Georgia Maloni for being the first woman prime minister in Italy.

The person trying to "confuse" is yourself Sir. Edmund Burke wrote many works (not one) and it is quite clear from his work, taken as a whole, that he stood for individual liberty and universal moral principles (by the way all Christians stand for universal moral principles) - he rejected that the idea that only people with "your lilies and roses in their faces" had rights under natural law - and he was always careful to make clear that he meant the life and property of individual human persons and voluntary associations (including churches), not some right of "the people" to rule. He was most certainly an "Old Whig" - what we now call a Classical Liberal. Burke was just as opposed to despotism from a King as he was the despotism of the mob - it was the rights of individual persons and the voluntary associations of Civil Society (such as the family) that he stood for.

Few men of his time did more for individual liberty than the "Old Whig" Edmund Burke - whether in relation to India, Ireland, England., America - or France. He opposed the French Revolution because he (rightly) believed it was a threat to individual liberty. The lives and property of individual human beings - in the name of the power of "the people". He was a Classical Liberal - which you deny.

🤔

At what point in the book does he actually begin discussing....you know...the French Revolution? I just started it, and so far, he is only speaking on England and defended their manner of selecting kings. I want to skip all of that, and get to where he speaks of his views on the the revolution.

*_Liberty in servitude!_* What bliss! But it has to be properly aimed. He's talking, in my estimation, about humility -- like the humility of Christ to God -- proclaiming himself to be a servant and not "good," but maintaining that the only one who is "good" is God Almighty and *_not_* himself. The businessman who adds value to the lives of their customers and clients remains in blissful servitude, wrapped in the self-discipline of fearless confidence combined with utter humility. When you get these done right, you might even find yourself standing at the *_Narrow Gate_* mentioned by Christ -- the opening which leads back to the base of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil found in the Garden of Heaven. A good president is a servant. So too is a good king. Christ repeatedly told his followers that he was here not to do his own will, but the will of He who had sent him. And we know Christ was *_not_* God, because, early in his ministry, he told Nicodemus that before he had come down from Heaven to become Yeshua of Nazareth, he had been the first to have gone up to Heaven. In other words, he had been a sinner like you and I and had conquered sin, becoming God's *_First Graduate!_*

"A cultivated Conservative friend of mine once exhibited great distress because in a gay moment I once called Edmund Burke an atheist. ... I mean that in the quarrel over the French Revolution, Burke did stand for the atheistic attitude and mode of argument, as Robespierre stood for the theistic." GK Chesterton

"We're in a bad place" - okay so leave then, you won't be missed. The world is leaving your behind.

you should read some Henry Ford next kek

lmao the 'feelings do matter' line really did it for me, i get it now - all conservative media is satire. thanks so much for this insight

3rd, 27 September 2022

PregerU is really a Preger you tube. This is not a University it's a KZfaq channel 🙄

Edmond Burke was a Simp for Antoinette. The real Chad was Thomas Paine!

LOL! Burke advocated for change in this text, slow change, but change nonetheless. (Re: The crowing of Will and Mary of Orange, joint rulers, not even English, Dutch people!) Notice how these two skirt around that very important part, that change is good as long as it’s slow (and not just based on what other countries did a hundred years ago). That’s why Knowles is so confused throughout this, because he is stuck defining things in one axiomatic way, when they always change anachronistically. MAGA is about regression; Burke was about slow progression. Not the same, and Knowles keeps trying to put his square peg in this round hole while failing to comprehend Burke. Awful video.

“Everyone in the world knows England’s traditions are better” This line of thinking is awful.