The Rights of Man

Why I Picked It Up / How It Read

I picked up The Rights of Man to deepen my understanding of how Americans viewed the French Revolution. The book is largely a directed response to Edmund Burke, whose book I haven't read, so while reading this, I felt a lot of missed context but it was an interesting read nonetheless.

What I Took Away

• Paine's treatment of political legitimacy as something grounded in the structure of rights, not in birth or inherited rank is indeed interesting and well-defended in the book.
• But I found the tackling of what defines these rights to be lacking. I didn't like quoting The Bible as authority in the argument, and giving very little to no space for discussing how the first communities arose and the nature of authority back then.
• I also really dislike history narratives that paint one side as angels and the other as devils, which he did narrating and justifying all the actions of the Fendch revolutionaries. I simply cannot trust an account that depicts events that goes against what I percieve as human nature. Absolving or denying any wrongdoings by the revolutionaries can't be anything but heavy bias; they are a group of humans, they must've done horrible things, and that doesn't necessarily mean I view them as horrible people.