#myconclusion

“When the only estate lawfully possessed, and which the contracting parties had in contemplation at the time in which their bargain was made, happens to fail, who, according to the principles of natural and legal equity, ought to be the sufferer? Certainly it ought to be either the party who trusted; or the party who persuaded him to trust; or both; and not third parties who had no concern with the transaction” (113).

“I hope we shall never be so totally lost to all sense of the duties imposed upon us by the law of social union, as, upon any pretext of public service, to confiscate the goods of a single unoffending citizen” (105).

Where do these “duties” and “the law of social union” come from? Why is the citizen entitled to anything? Who is “we”? (the government, members of society)? 

I see room for contradictions in Burke’s main arguments. e.g. what tradition is strongest: government or the duties of social union of a society? Perhaps, it is at this point, when the traditions of government and the duties of a social union of a society are in conflict, that the government must be remodeled/repaired.