For Burke, the connection between tradition and progress is everything, the success of the latter being dependent on the former, while not excluding the understanding that sometimes innovation can be good. I think that a necessary connection does exist between progress and tradition. It is impossible to advance if you are consumed with reinventing the state in which you currently exist, instead of taking the good parts of it and moving forward.
Burke has great respect for the collective wisdom of one’s forefathers because he sees it as helpful in avoiding mistakes, and necessary for making progress as a society. When speaking of the latter, in terms of the improvements that England has made in science, arts, and literature, he credits the success to tradition. Part of this crediting of history is due to the fact that he sees society as a partnership that involves everyone from history, the present, and the future, making “each contract of each particular state but a clause in the great primeval contract of eternal society.” He sees mankind across all of time as being interdependent, and thus history is intrinsically influential to progress. Burke says that one main cause of the improvements in science, the arts, and so forth, was the fact that England did not “despise the patrimony of knowledge which was left us by our forefathers.”
Learning from the past also helps us avoid future mistakes. “In history,” Burke says, “a great volume is unrolled for our instruction drawing the materials of future wisdom from the past errors and infirmities of mankind.” Here he is saying that all of history is in a sense, a book full of the lessons of people who have gone before us, and by reading the history of their triumphs and failures, we are able to benefit our own lives. The fact that we need to learn from history evidences the connection between progress and tradition. Learning from the successes and failures of the past allows us to not repeat their mistakes while simultaneously taking note of the strengths and implanting them.
It is important to note that even though Burke does hold tradition in such high esteem, he recognizes that there can be legitimate occasions for when change is necessary. “A state without the means of some change is without the means of its conservation,” Burke said. Sometimes change is the only means for the preservation of the state, so Burke lays out the two principles of right “conservation and correction” that England used during its revolution. Further explained, though England “has lost the bond of union in their ancient edifice; they did not however, dissolve the whole fabric. On the contrary, in both cases they regenerated the deficient part of the old constitution through the parts which were not impaired.” Here Burke is identifying the two-fold formula for right revolution, or the correct way to go about changing established institutions or principles. What the English did correctly in their revolution was that they did not just overthrow their government and so dissolve the whole fabric of their society. Rather, they focused on the deficient parts, and rebuilt what needed attention, while leaving alone the “parts which were not impaired.” Change to something new is possible, but it should be incremental, and not without regard to what is still good about the old.
It is interesting to evaluate American society in light of reading Burke. We seem to be a society that is largely made up of people who are coming to eschew tradition more and more, and where being an innovator, or being on the cutting edge of society seems to make a person more accepted and interesting. While innovation in technology is good (yay for new media!), and I would not say that advancements in science are unqualifiedly bad, we must ask the question of what drives our desire for progress? Why do we think newer is better? What makes us want to reject the past?
It seems clear that if we disregard tradition, we will be ignoring what has brought us to where we are today. Our successes of the present, are, as Burke noted, connected to the past. We often hear the phrase ‘traditional values’ used in terms of the stability of our country. It is precisely in our values as a society that it is most important that we are careful to not throw away tradition just because newer might be better. Indeed, if our values as a society are correct, then the attitudes that drive science, technology and business will be able to be held in check. While tradition is not infallible, and as Burke even admitted, it sometimes needs to be changed, I do not think that one should get rid of it without good reason and without recognizing the good part that it plays. We are given a good example of this in Fiddler on the Roof, specifically in the song “Tradition.” In this song, Tevye explains the roles of each group of people (fathers, mothers, son, and daughters) within the village, and how the traditional roles of people like the rabbi and the matchmaker contribute to the village. Tradition here shows how everyone playing their role has enabled the society to continue and progress. When priests do what they are supposed to, and matchmakers and clockmakers and bakers all do what they are supposed to, life is able to roll on. On the other hand any change could cause significant problems, so change with caution, and do not throw away what is good about the old.
The best example that I can think of in our society today of how even in change, the good parts of tradition are being thrown away is in our country’s idea marriage. While I do not think that there is actually any improvement or change that can be made in the traditional idea of marriage because I believe that it is not only the best, but also the right way, we do not even see progression while keeping the good of the old. And by that I mean our society is not even recognizing homosexual marriage or co-habitation as new, but equally valid relationships with marriage. Rather, traditional marriage and commitment are being looked on as old-fashioned, boring, and limited, and are being thrown out solely in favor of new things. We are no longer building on the past, or revising the broken parts. We are getting rid of the most foundational relationship in all of society and completely replacing it with things that are more open-minded, not discriminatory, and more convenient.
Plato, in his Laws, called homosexuality an excess desire for pleasure. I think the same could be said for any relationship that rejects traditional marriage (which, consequently, is to be desired, so it is not as if we are faced with a dilemma of spending Saturday with the cool aunt, or being at home doing chores--we can have our cake and eat it too). Our excess desire for pleasure, combined with a broken ‘happiness compass’ leads our society to Amusing Ourselves to Death (Neil Postman). By rejecting the tradition of marriage, which is so foundational and basic to a society, sometimes I wonder what how our culture can survive. However, there is yet hope. "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed people can change the world,” says Margaret Mead, “Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.” There is still much good left in our society, and so long as we do not give up faith that there is more to this world than meets the eye, we have reason for thankfulness, joy, and hope.
Burke was right in his defense of tradition. We would do well to heed his critique in our society today and hold conservation and correction in our hands along with change and tradition.
