romikgosai/squad_modified huggingface dataset:
Burke's Reflections sparked a pamphlet war. Thomas Paine penned the Rights of Man in 1791 as a response to Burke; Mary Wollstonecraft published A Vindication of the Rights of Men and James Mackintosh wrote Vindiciae Gallicae. Mackintosh was the first to see the Reflections as "the manifesto of a Counter Revolution". Mackintosh later agreed with Burke's views, remarking in December 1796 after meeting him, that Burke was "minutely and accurately informed, to a wonderful exactness, with respect to every fact relating to the French Revolution". Mackintosh later said: "Burke was one of the first thinkers as well as one of the greatest orators of his time. He is without parallel in any age, excepting perhaps Lord Bacon and Cicero; and his works contain an ampler store of political and moral wisdom than can be found in any other writer whatever".

Questions and answers:
["
Q: Who wrote 'The Rights of Man'?
A: Thomas Paine", "
Q: Who wrote 'A Vindication of the Rights of Men'?
A: Mary Wollstonecraft", '
Q: Who said the Reflections were "the manifesto of a Counter Revolution"?
A: James Mackintosh', '
Q: Who did Mackintosh compare Burke to?
A: Lord Bacon and Cicero', '
Q: What types of wisdom did Mackintosh say Burke had?
A: political and moral']
In November 1790, François-Louis-Thibault de Menonville, a member of the National Assembly of France, wrote to Burke, praising Reflections and requesting more "very refreshing mental food" that he could publish. This Burke did in April 1791 when he published A Letter to a Member of the National Assembly. Burke called for external forces to reverse the revolution and included an attack on the late French philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau, as being the subject of a personality cult that had developed in revolutionary France. Although Burke conceded that Rousseau sometimes showed "a considerable insight into human nature" he mostly was critical. Although he did not meet Rousseau on his visit to Britain in 1766–7 Burke was a friend of David Hume, with whom Rousseau had stayed. Burke said Rousseau "entertained no principle either to influence of his heart, or to guide his understanding—but vanity"—which he "was possessed to a degree little short of madness". He also cited Rousseau's Confessions as evidence that Rousseau had a life of "obscure and vulgar vices" that was not "chequered, or spotted here and there, with virtues, or even distinguished by a single good action". Burke contrasted Rousseau's theory of universal benevolence and his having sent his children to a foundling hospital: "a lover of his kind, but a hater of his kindred".

Questions and answers:
['
Q: Who asked Burke for more "very refreshing mental food"?
A: François-Louis-Thibault de Menonville', "
Q: When did Burke release 'A Letter to a Member of the National Assembly'?
A: April 1791", '
Q: Which French philosopher did Burke attack?
A: Jean-Jacques Rousseau', '
Q: When did Rousseau visit Britain?
A: 1766–7', '
Q: Who did Rousseau stay with when visiting Britain?
A: David Hume']
These events and the disagreements that arose from them within the Whig Party, led to its break-up and to the rupture of Burke's friendship with Fox. In debate in Parliament on Britain's relations with Russia, Fox praised the principles of the revolution, although Burke was not able to reply at this time as he was "overpowered by continued cries of question from his own side of the House". When Parliament was debating the Quebec Bill for a constitution for Canada, Fox praised the revolution and criticised some of Burke's arguments, such as hereditary power. On 6 May 1791, during another debate in Parliament on the Quebec Bill, Burke used the opportunity to answer Fox, and to condemn the new French Constitution and "the horrible consequences flowing from the French idea of the Rights of Man". Burke asserted that those ideas were the antithesis of both the British and the American constitutions. Burke was interrupted, and Fox intervened, saying that Burke should be allowed to carry on with his speech. A vote of censure was moved against Burke, however, for noticing the affairs of France, which was moved by Lord Sheffield and seconded by Fox. Pitt made a speech praising Burke, and Fox made a speech—both rebuking and complimenting Burke. He questioned the sincerity of Burke, who seemed to have forgotten the lessons he had learned from him, quoting from Burke's own speeches of fourteen and fifteen years before.

Questions and answers:
['
Q: Fox praised revolutionary principles in a debate about which country?
A: Russia', '
Q: What type of power did Fox think Burke was wrong about?
A: hereditary', '
Q: Which constitution did Burke condemn on May 6, 1791?
A: French', "
Q: Fox quoted Burke's speeches from how long ago?
A: fourteen and fifteen years"]
At this point, Fox whispered that there was "no loss of friendship". "I regret to say there is", Burke replied, "I have indeed made a great sacrifice; I have done my duty though I have lost my friend. There is something in the detested French constitution that envenoms every thing it touches". This provoked a reply from Fox, yet he was unable to give his speech for some time since he was overcome with tears and emotion, he appealed to Burke to remember their inalienable friendship, but also repeated his criticisms of Burke and uttered "unusually bitter sarcasms". This only aggravated the rupture between the two men. Burke demonstrated his separation from the party on 5 June 1791 by writing to Fitzwilliam, declining money from him.

Questions and answers:
['
Q: When did Burke leave the Whig party?
A: 5 June 1791', '
Q: Who did Burke turn down money from?
A: Fitzwilliam', "
Q: What did Burke say 'envenoms everything it touches'?
A: French constitution", '
Q: Who thought that Fox and Burke could still be friends?
A: Fox', "
Q: Who thought that Fox and Burke's friendship was lost?
A: Burke"]
Burke knew that many members of the Whig Party did not share Fox's views and he wanted to provoke them into condemning the French Revolution. Burke wrote that he wanted to represent the whole Whig party "as tolerating, and by a toleration, countenancing those proceedings" so that he could "stimulate them to a public declaration of what every one of their acquaintance privately knows to be...their sentiments". Therefore, on 3 August 1791 Burke published his Appeal from the New to the Old Whigs, in which he renewed his criticism of the radical revolutionary programmes inspired by the French Revolution and attacked the Whigs who supported them, as holding principles contrary to those traditionally held by the Whig party.

Questions and answers:
['
Q: What did Burke want the Whigs to condemn?
A: the French Revolution', '
Q: What did Burke publish on Aug 3, 1791?
A: Appeal from the New to the Old Whigs', '
Q: Burke thought the French Revolution was against whose principles?
A: the Whig party', '
Q: Burke attacked Whigs who supported what?
A: the French Revolution']
Although Whig grandees such as Portland and Fitzwilliam privately agreed with Burke's Appeal, they wished he had used more moderate language. Fitzwilliam saw the Appeal as containing "the doctrines I have sworn by, long and long since". Francis Basset, a backbench Whig MP, wrote to Burke: "...though for reasons which I will not now detail I did not then deliver my sentiments, I most perfectly differ from Mr. Fox & from the great Body of opposition on the French Revolution". Burke sent a copy of the Appeal to the king and the king requested a friend to communicate to Burke that he had read it "with great Satisfaction". Burke wrote of its reception: "Not one word from one of our party. They are secretly galled. They agree with me to a title; but they dare not speak out for fear of hurting Fox. ... They leave me to myself; they see that I can do myself justice". Charles Burney viewed it as "a most admirable book—the best & most useful on political subjects that I have ever seen" but believed the differences in the Whig Party between Burke and Fox should not be aired publicly.

Questions and answers:
['
Q: Who thought Burke should have written in a more moderate tone?
A: Portland and Fitzwilliam', "
Q: Who said he 'perfectly differed from Mr. Fox'?
A: Francis Basset", "
Q: What was Francis Basset's political party?
A: Whig", '
Q: How did Burke think the Whigs secretly felt?
A: galled', "
Q: Who thought Burke and Fox shouldn't have made their argument public?
A: Charles Burney"]
Burke supported the war against revolutionary France, seeing Britain as fighting on the side of the royalists and émigres in a civil war, rather than fighting against the whole nation of France. Burke also supported the royalist uprising in La Vendée, describing it on 4 November 1793 in a letter to William Windham, as "the sole affair I have much heart in". Burke wrote to Henry Dundas on 7 October urging him to send reinforcements there, as he viewed it as the only theatre in the war that might lead to a march on Paris. Dundas did not follow Burke's advice, however.

Questions and answers:
['
Q: Who did Burke write to on Nov 4, 1793?
A: William Windham', "
Q: Which faction's uprising in La Vendee did Burke support?
A: royalist", '
Q: Who did Burke urge to send reinforcements to La Vendee?
A: Henry Dundas', '
Q: Where did Burke think La Vendee might lead to a march on?
A: Paris', '
Q: What did Burke support Britain fighting against?
A: revolutionary France']
Burke believed the Government was not taking the uprising seriously enough, a view reinforced by a letter he had received from the Prince Charles of France (S.A.R. le comte d'Artois), dated 23 October, requesting that he intercede on behalf of the royalists to the Government. Burke was forced to reply on 6 November: "I am not in His Majesty's Service; or at all consulted in his Affairs". Burke published his Remarks on the Policy of the Allies with Respect to France, begun in October, where he said: "I am sure every thing has shewn us that in this war with France, one Frenchman is worth twenty foreigners. La Vendée is a proof of this".

Questions and answers:
['
Q: When did Prince Charles write to Burke?
A: 23 October', '
Q: How many foreign supporters did Burke think a French royalist was worth?
A: twenty', '
Q: What did Burke see as proof of the importance of French royalists?
A: La Vendée', '
Q: What country was Prince Charles part of the ruling family of?
A: France', '
Q: In what writing did Burke comment about the importance of La Vendee?
A: Remarks on the Policy of the Allies with Respect to France']
On 20 June 1794, Burke received a vote of thanks from the Commons for his services in the Hastings Trial and he immediately resigned his seat, being replaced by his son Richard. A tragic blow fell upon Burke with the loss of Richard in August 1794, to whom he was tenderly attached, and in whom he saw signs of promise, which were not patent to others and which, in fact, appear to have been non-existent (though this view may have rather reflected the fact that Richard Burke had worked successfully in the early battle for Catholic emancipation). King George III, whose favour he had gained by his attitude on the French Revolution, wished to create him Earl of Beaconsfield, but the death of his son deprived the opportunity of such an honour and all its attractions, so the only award he would accept was a pension of £2,500. Even this modest reward was attacked by the Duke of Bedford and the Earl of Lauderdale, to whom Burke replied in his Letter to a Noble Lord (1796): "It cannot at this time be too often repeated; line upon line; precept upon precept; until it comes into the currency of a proverb, To innovate is not to reform". He argued that he was rewarded on merit, but the Duke of Bedford received his rewards from inheritance alone, his ancestor being the original pensioner: "Mine was from a mild and benevolent sovereign; his from Henry the Eighth". Burke also hinted at what would happen to such people if their revolutionary ideas were implemented, and included a description of the British constitution:

Questions and answers:
['
Q: When did Burke receive a vote of thanks?
A: 20 June 1794', "
Q: When did Burke's son die?
A: August 1794", '
Q: What did King George III want to make Burke an Earl of?
A: Beaconsfield', '
Q: How much money did Burke accept instead of the Earlship?
A: £2,500', '
Q: Who attacked Burke for receiving recognition from King George III?
A: Duke of Bedford and the Earl of Lauderdale']
Burke's last publications were the Letters on a Regicide Peace (October 1796), called forth by negotiations for peace with France by the Pitt government. Burke regarded this as appeasement, injurious to national dignity and honour. In his Second Letter, Burke wrote of the French Revolutionary Government: "Individuality is left out of their scheme of government. The State is all in all. Everything is referred to the production of force; afterwards, everything is trusted to the use of it. It is military in its principle, in its maxims, in its spirit, and in all its movements. The State has dominion and conquest for its sole objects—dominion over minds by proselytism, over bodies by arms".

Questions and answers:
["
Q: What was Burke's final publication?
A: Letters on a Regicide Peace", "
Q: When was Burke's final publication?
A: October 1796", '
Q: What did Burke think was missing from the French Revolutionary Government?
A: Individuality', "
Q: What did Burke think were the French Revolutionary Government's only goals?
A: dominion and conquest", '
Q: What negotiations did Burke think were appeasement?
A: negotiations for peace with France by the Pitt government']
This is held to be the first explanation of the modern concept of totalitarian state. Burke regarded the war with France as ideological, against an "armed doctrine". He wished that France would not be partitioned due to the effect this would have on the balance of power in Europe, and that the war was not against France, but against the revolutionaries governing her. Burke said: "It is not France extending a foreign empire over other nations: it is a sect aiming at universal empire, and beginning with the conquest of France".

Questions and answers:
['
Q: What did Burke think the war with France was against?
A: an "armed doctrine"', "
Q: Burke hoped which country wouldn't be partitioned?
A: France", '
Q: What kind of empire did Burke think the French revolutionaries wanted?
A: universal', '
Q: Who did Burke think the war was against, rather than France as a whole?
A: the revolutionaries governing her']
In November 1795, there was a debate in Parliament on the high price of corn and Burke wrote a memorandum to Pitt on the subject. In December Samuel Whitbread MP introduced a bill giving magistrates the power to fix minimum wages and Fox said he would vote for it. This debate probably led Burke to editing his memorandum, as there appeared a notice that Burke would soon publish a letter on the subject to the Secretary of the Board of Agriculture, Arthur Young; but he failed to complete it. These fragments were inserted into the memorandum after his death and published posthumously in 1800 as, Thoughts and Details on Scarcity. In it, Burke expounded "some of the doctrines of political economists bearing upon agriculture as a trade". Burke criticised policies such as maximum prices and state regulation of wages, and set out what the limits of government should be:

Questions and answers:
['
Q: Who did Burke write to about the price of corn?
A: Pitt', '
Q: Who introduced a bill in 1795 about minimum wage?
A: Samuel Whitbread', '
Q: Who was the Secretary of the Board of Agriculture?
A: Arthur Young', "
Q: Burke's unfinished letter to Arthur Young became part of what publication?
A: Thoughts and Details on Scarcity", "
Q: When was 'Thoughts and Details on Scarcity' published?
A: 1800"]
Writing to a friend in May 1795, Burke surveyed the causes of discontent: "I think I can hardly overrate the malignity of the principles of Protestant ascendency, as they affect Ireland; or of Indianism [i.e. corporate tyranny, as practiced by the British East Indies Company], as they affect these countries, and as they affect Asia; or of Jacobinism, as they affect all Europe, and the state of human society itself. The last is the greatest evil". By March 1796, however Burke had changed his mind: "Our Government and our Laws are beset by two different Enemies, which are sapping its foundations, Indianism, and Jacobinism. In some Cases they act separately, in some they act in conjunction: But of this I am sure; that the first is the worst by far, and the hardest to deal with; and for this amongst other reasons, that it weakens discredits, and ruins that force, which ought to be employed with the greatest Credit and Energy against the other; and that it furnishes Jacobinism with its strongest arms against all formal Government".

Questions and answers:
['
Q: Whose ascendancy did Burke think was malignant?
A: Protestant', '
Q: What did Burke call corporate tyranny in India?
A: Indianism', '
Q: Which continent did Jacobinism affect?
A: Europe', '
Q: When did Burke decide Indianism was the worst threat?
A: March 1796', '
Q: What did Burke think was the worst threat in 1795?
A: Jacobinism']
Burke believed that property was essential to human life. Because of his conviction that people desire to be ruled and controlled, the division of property formed the basis for social structure, helping develop control within a property-based hierarchy. He viewed the social changes brought on by property as the natural order of events, which should be taking place as the human race progressed. With the division of property and the class system, he also believed that it kept the monarch in check to the needs of the classes beneath the monarch. Since property largely aligned or defined divisions of social class, class too, was seen as natural—part of a social agreement that the setting of persons into different classes, is the mutual benefit of all subjects. Concern for property is not Burke's only influence. As Christopher Hitchens summarises, "If modern conservatism can be held to derive from Burke, it is not just because he appealed to property owners in behalf of stability but also because he appealed to an everyday interest in the preservation of the ancestral and the immemorial."

Questions and answers:
['
Q: What did Burke think was crucial for human life?
A: property', '
Q: What did Burke think a social hierarchy should be based on?
A: property', '
Q: Who did Burke think a social class structure benefited?
A: all subjects', '
Q: Who wrote that Burke "appealed to property owners"?
A: Christopher Hitchens', '
Q: What did Hitchens think Burke supported preserving?
A: the ancestral and the immemorial']
In the nineteenth century Burke was praised by both liberals and conservatives. Burke's friend Philip Francis wrote that Burke "was a man who truly & prophetically foresaw all the consequences which would rise from the adoption of the French principles" but because Burke wrote with so much passion, people were doubtful of his arguments. William Windham spoke from the same bench in the House of Commons as Burke had, when he had separated from Fox, and an observer said Windham spoke "like the ghost of Burke" when he made a speech against peace with France in 1801. William Hazlitt, a political opponent of Burke, regarded him as amongst his three favourite writers (the others being Junius and Rousseau), and made it "a test of the sense and candour of any one belonging to the opposite party, whether he allowed Burke to be a great man". William Wordsworth was originally a supporter of the French Revolution and attacked Burke in 'A Letter to the Bishop of Llandaff' (1793), but by the early nineteenth century he had changed his mind and came to admire Burke. In his Two Addresses to the Freeholders of Westmorland Wordsworth called Burke "the most sagacious Politician of his age" whose predictions "time has verified". He later revised his poem The Prelude to include praise of Burke ("Genius of Burke! forgive the pen seduced/By specious wonders") and portrayed him as an old oak. Samuel Taylor Coleridge came to have a similar conversion: he had criticised Burke in The Watchman, but in his Friend (1809–10) Coleridge defended Burke from charges of inconsistency. Later, in his Biographia Literaria (1817) Coleridge hails Burke as a prophet and praises Burke for referring "habitually to principles. He was a scientific statesman; and therefore a seer". Henry Brougham wrote of Burke: "... all his predictions, save one momentary expression, had been more than fulfilled: anarchy and bloodshed had borne sway in France; conquest and convulsion had desolated Europe...the providence of mortals is not often able to penetrate so far as this into futurity". George Canning believed that Burke's Reflections "has been justified by the course of subsequent events; and almost every prophecy has been strictly fulfilled". In 1823 Canning wrote that he took Burke's "last works and words [as] the manual of my politics". The Conservative Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli "was deeply penetrated with the spirit and sentiment of Burke's later writings".

Questions and answers:
["
Q: Who thought Burke was prophetic about the French revolution's consequences?
A: Philip Francis", "
Q: What did Francis think Burke's writing had too much of?
A: passion", "
Q: Who made speeches very similar to Burke's in Parliament?
A: William Windham", '
Q: When did Windham speak against peace with France?
A: 1801', '
Q: When did Wordsworth initially attack Burke?
A: 1793']
The 19th-century Liberal Prime Minister William Ewart Gladstone considered Burke "a magazine of wisdom on Ireland and America" and in his diary recorded: "Made many extracts from Burke—sometimes almost divine". The Radical MP and anti-Corn Law activist Richard Cobden often praised Burke's Thoughts and Details on Scarcity. The Liberal historian Lord Acton considered Burke one of the three greatest Liberals, along with William Gladstone and Thomas Babington Macaulay. Lord Macaulay recorded in his diary: "I have now finished reading again most of Burke's works. Admirable! The greatest man since Milton". The Gladstonian Liberal MP John Morley published two books on Burke (including a biography) and was influenced by Burke, including his views on prejudice. The Cobdenite Radical Francis Hirst thought Burke deserved "a place among English libertarians, even though of all lovers of liberty and of all reformers he was the most conservative, the least abstract, always anxious to preserve and renovate rather than to innovate. In politics he resembled the modern architect who would restore an old house instead of pulling it down to construct a new one on the site". Burke's Reflections on the Revolution in France was controversial at the time of its publication, but after his death, it was to become his best known and most influential work, and a manifesto for Conservative thinking.

Questions and answers:
['
Q: What political party was Gladstone in?
A: Liberal', '
Q: What countries did Gladstone think Burke was wise about?
A: Ireland and America', '
Q: What was Cobden an activist against?
A: Corn Law', '
Q: Lord Macaulay thought Burke was the best author since whom?
A: Milton', '
Q: Who thought Burke was like an architect remodeling an old house instead of tearing it down?
A: Francis Hirst']