Old Whigs: Burke, Lincoln, and the Politics of Prudence

by Greg Weiner

The virtue of prudence suffuses the writings of Edmund Burke and Abraham Lincoln, yet the demands of statecraft compelled both to take daring positions against long Burke against the seemingly inexorable march of the French Revolution, Lincoln against disunion at a moment when the Northern situation appeared untenable. Placing their statesmanship and writings in relief helps to illuminate prudence in its full inflected with caution but not confined to it, bound to circumstance, and finding expression in the particular but grounded in the absolute. This comparative study of two thinkers and statesmen who described themselves as “Old Whigs” argues for a recovery of prudence as the political virtue par excellence by viewing it through the eyes, words, and deeds of two of its foremost exemplars.

Both statesmen who were deeply informed by the life of the mind, Burke and Lincoln illustrate prudence in its universal but also contrasting dimensions. Burke emphasized the primacy of feeling, Lincoln the axioms of logic. Burke saw British prudence emanating from the mists of ancient history; for Lincoln, America’s soul lay in a discrete moment of founding in 1776. Yet both were moved by a respect for the mysterious and customary. Each maintained the virtue of compromise while adhering to immovable commitments.

At a time when American politics, and American conservatism in particular, teems with a desire for boldness but also an innate resistance to schemes of social or political transformation, this book answers with a fuller and richer account of prudence as it emerges in the thought and action of two of the greatest statesmen and thinkers of modern times.

Genres: History, American History, Politics

172 pages, Kindle Edition

Published June 11, 2019

Reviews

[Brian Eshleman · Rating 4 out of 5]

The reading experience was one of dueling quotes which did not always line up precisely and a lot of restatement of the same general principles of prudence. Still, the raw material from which Weiner draws is from such master communicators that the book is well worth reading.

[Russel Henderson · Rating 5 out of 5]

A slender but dense tome attempting to reconcile the thought of the two great men, Weiner's work succeeds in many respects. As he points out, the unlettered Lincoln was far more apt to refer to reason than was the more literary Burke, a distinction Weiner tries a little too hard to smooth away. And while both were undoubtedly prudent, Burke's prudential thinking and Lincoln's prudent politicking are not the same. Burke was influential in his day but spent much of it in opposition and his time in power was quite brief; Lincoln, by contrast, helmed the ship of state through the most turbulent four years from the Founding until at least the 1910s, perhaps the Great Depression. Similarly, Burke's thought was influenced by his environment, the 18th Century London of Pitt and Johnson and the Enlightenment thinkers, with whom he interacted in various Clubs and social circles. Conversely, Lincoln's milieu was, with the exception of his term as a representative and then his Presidency, the prairie towns of the young Midwest, the courtrooms and the taverns; while Burke was secretary to Rockingham Lincoln worked odd jobs, read law, and then carved out a practice based in large part on the railroads. Thus Lincoln's wisdom and humor were homespun, folksy, and self-deprecating, while Burke's wit was that of a caste of great thinkers, perhaps the greatest "moment of the mind" in the history of Britain. Burke also wrote voluminously (though he was an almost peerless orator in his day), while Lincoln's thought must be gleaned from his speeches, his actions, and a limited number of letters that survive. However, he distills the very Burkean manner in which Lincoln saw fit to ground his actions and his criticisms of his foes in the wisdom of the "ancients," in his case the Founders that served as the wellspring of all American political legitimacy until, well, Lincoln.

Weiner perceptively boils down the Lincoln and the Burke approach to natural rights, contra the French Revolutionaries, as crucial in importance but limited in breadth. Such a slender volume offered limited opportunity to address religion, but he explained concisely the importance of sincere faith to Burke's concept of civil society and the related with perhaps less vitality the role of religion, or at least religious rhetoric, in Lincoln's exhortations. Again, I'm not entirely sure Weiner succeeds in his object, but his attempt is a very perceptive, very readable look at two giants

[David Kent · Rating 3 out of 5]

While a somewhat esoteric treatment, I enjoyed about half of this book comparing the prudential nature of Edmund Burke and Abraham Lincoln. Weiner is a Burke scholar and I am a Lincoln scholar, so perhaps much of my concern with the book can be drawn from that divergent background. In addition, Burke was a British politician in the 18th century while Lincoln was a frontier-raised American in the 19th century. Along with that considerable difference in upbringing comes Burke's convoluted language reflecting the cumbersome diction of his age. In contrast, Lincoln is renowned for his ability to communicate in "common," i.e., more easily understood, language.

While ostensibly a treatise on their common belief in acting with prudence - cautious, thoughtful, but bold when appropriate - I got the impression, and indeed Weiner often states, that the two men were actually quite different in many of their thoughts and beliefs, save for this idea of prudence. For example, Weiner admits that Lincoln and Burke differed in their views on reason, liberty, and elsewhere. Perhaps this is why the author chose a format of alternating chapters - Burke's views in one chapter, followed by Lincoln's views on that topic in the next. Doing so allows him to elucidate the prudence of each while avoiding the apparent discordance.

Because of the cumbersome language, which I didn't feel the author adequately compensated for, I found myself not being much informed in the Burke chapters. The Lincoln chapters were much more cogent, perhaps mostly because I was familiar with the quotes and context discussed, but also because the writing seemed to mimic Lincoln's clarity. Weiner is convincing in his argument that both men were prudent in their political action; however, for Lincoln at least, this idea isn't particularly new (e.g., see Joseph Fornieri's "Abraham Lincoln: Philosopher Statesman").

Students of Burke may come to the opposite conclusions of mine above. If so, my sense of the book can be chocked up to familiarity with one of the subjects versus the author's focus on the other. Turning Burke's archaic writing into more comprehensible discussion would have improved the book in my mind. Still, overall, I found the Lincoln sections enjoyable and useful.

[Isabella · Rating 4 out of 5]

I might have understood this book better if I had a better knowledge of Lincoln’s writings or stories. Since I have read many works by Edmund Burke, the content related to him was easier for me to read. Overall, this book talks about both men’s concepts of prudence, exploring the similarities and differences between their ideas.
For Burke, prudence is the principal virtue in politics. Nevertheless, he argued that while caution was necessary in formulating the principles and plans, bold action was required in advocating them. The rules of prudence were “never to reason for the ordinary case from the extreme case and never to carry principles to their logical extremes.” Prudence reflects on ideas, but it always accommodates the circumstance, trusting feelings more than abstract reasoning.
Lincoln’s prudence was both different and similar to that of Burke. Lincoln’s reasoning was based on universally applicable principles, though he always kept a concrete end in mind. In spite of his devotion to general maxims, they were only applied to restore, not to innovate, to correct wrongs, rather than to create a Utopia. Lincoln’s political caution can be illustrated in the issue of slavery, seeking gradual alleviation but also with a fixed vision of its abolishment. Like Burke, Lincoln was also a champion of liberty, which was a limited and concrete one. He believed in definable natural rights rather than those in abstract reasoning. The author argued that Lincoln’s reverence for custom was underestimated. Both men combined traditions with reason, while Lincoln discerned custom as a foundation of the rightness of principles.
In the end, custom represents limitation, moderation, and, of course, prudence. Another interesting point the author made is about how historians estimate statesmanship. He argued that reviews for statesmen often centered around changes while excluding prudence. I think it is hard to do justice in measuring the greatness of statesmen who managed to keep social order and avoid changes, but that doesn’t mean we should forget them easily.