Common Sense, written by Thomas Paine and published anonymously, provides both an intellectual backing and a roadmap for full American independence from England. Importantly, while it is often read and taught as a book that is only concerned with questions related to America and England, Paine also lays out a comprehensive political philosophy that is anti-monarchy and based in his understanding of the virtue of republican democracy. It was his hope that America could serve as a model democracy that could eventually be exported around the world.
We’ll begin with this political philosophy and then move more directly into the American case. There are four main principles that make up Paine’s argument:
1. Government’s only purpose is to provide its citizens with security from the vices that are inherent in all humans.
Consider humans in a total state of nature. They realize soon that they need to band together and form a society to survive and thrive. However, a society without regulations will quickly crumble, because some evil men will see an opportunity to take advantage of others. Government thus originates because humans agree to give up some of their freedoms, including privacy or freedom from conscription into an army, in order to exist in a collective that will protect them from the evil of others.
The success and happiness of any colony or nation rest on a citizenry that feels its government is an effective protector and does not overreach. A successful government does not include kings, like the one in England. The role of king is tyrannical by its very nature because kings are not elected, and so have no reason to listen to their constituents. It is thus the right of Americans to overthrow the tyrannical government of England.
2. Monarchical governments are evil, particularly heredity monarchies.
The Bible shows that the distinction of men into kings and subjects is wrong. The only ruler of men should be God, which is proven in many stories in the Bible. Paine uses the example of the Jews, after being led to a great victory by Gideon, attempting to make him their king. Gideon refuses, proving his own virtue by noting that men shouldn’t have kings.
Hereditary monarchy is even more of a sin, because if all men are created equal, the virtues of one man who may become king have no bearing on the qualities of his offspring.
These Hereditary Monarchies also create governing problems. First, the longer a Hereditary Monarchy continues, the more kings will be removed from the issues facing their subjects, and thus will be unable to rule over them successfully, even if they want to do right by their people. Second, it’s impossible to have any real checks and balances in a monarchy, because even if there are lower houses of government (like in England), the king has ultimate authority, and if he is unhappy with the decisions of these lower houses he can check their power in return.
3. Given that England, with a tyrannical system of government, has begun to violently oppress the American people, America should break free.
There are lots of arguments for reconciliation with England. The most prominent include:
These are all misguided, though, because England has dragged America into her own conflicts and suppressed America’s trade and growth. America has become too large and complex for England to manage.
If America is well-organized, it can win a victory. And if America chooses not to seek independence, the King of England will become more tyrannical, any agreement made will only be temporary, and the American citizens may lose the unity that they have right now. If America’s population grows and the conflict drags on, it’s only natural based on the size of the colony that partisans will take up positions and infighting will begin.
When it finally is created, the American system should be a republic that has annual meetings and has many legislators, elected regularly by the people, in order to provide a government that is a bulwark against one or two people with nefarious interests being able to gain too much power.
4. America has the capabilities to stand on her own.
Common Sense was written by Thomas Paine (and published anonymously) to provide an intellectual backing for American independence from England. An English-born philosopher, Paine authored the pamphlet between 1775-1776. Despite the fact that there were only 2.5 million people living in America, it sold between 100,000 and 500,000 copies in its first year of publication, and it was reprinted in newspapers and copied by hand and distributed that way as well. Estimates suggest that, in relation to population, it retains the title of the most widely circulated publication in American history.
The Americans to whom Paine was speaking were, by Paine’s own estimation, interested more in reconciliation with the English government than establishing their own, despite the fact that the Boston Tea Party and the battles of Lexington and Concord had already occurred at the time of writing.
While Paine’s ultimate goal certainly included convincing Americans of the righteousness of revolution and separation from England, the pamphlet itself is actually more directly concerned with larger questions of political philosophy. It begins with a long treatise on the natural state of humans and how government, once created, should function, and moves from there into an anti-monarchist treatise. Paine is then able to apply this framework to the American case.
(It’s unclear how much, if any, impact Paine’s pamphlet had on the ultimate U.S. Constitutional Convention. He advocated for many more citizens to be involved in the drafting of the document and for a more expansive democracy than was ultimately ratified—in particular, he believed that men who do not own property should be allowed to both vote and serve in public office.)
In this summary, we will take a direct approach to Common Sense, moving largely chapter by chapter through Paine’s argument, and exploring the following principles:
Government is a necessity to protect its citizens from the inherent vice in humanity, and its sole purpose is to provide its citizens with security. In this chapter, we will analyze Paine’s ideal government.
In order to understand what makes an ideal government, we need first to understand the difference between government and society.
Because evil develops in society and among humans, they agree to enter into a contract where they give up some of their freedoms for protections from said evil. Government is about security.
Paine introduces a thought experiment about how government comes to be. (Shortform note: This sort of thought experiment is popular in seminal political philosophy, including most famously in Thomas Hobbes’ Leviathan and Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s Social Contract.)
What happens when a small group of people is totally sequestered from the rest of the world?
The happiness and success of the colony rest on the citizenry being happy and the government being effective. The best government is one that’s unlikely to fail and easy to repair when it does. In practice, this takes the form of representative government that comes directly from the citizens and involves frequent elections and turnover of representatives.
The Constitution of England is unsuccessful according to the aforementioned principles of government for three reasons:
While some argue that the English Constitution makes England unique in Europe because it outlines checks on the King’s power, the king is just as removed from the rest of society and just as responsible to make decisions on their collective behalf as in any other European monarchy. The idea of a monarchy is absurd on its face (discussed in the next chapter).
The American people are oppressed by the King of England and the Parliament—it is their right to throw off the shackles because the government of England does not function well.
Oppression in America is similar to oppression that has existed and will exist around the world. Given that oppression is universal, the ideas contained within are applicable anywhere.
Consider what you prioritize in your daily life by thinking about your ideal society and government.
Do you agree with Paine’s assertion that the sole purpose of government is to protect its citizens? Why or why not? If not, what are other purposes of government?
Does your government meet Paine’s requirements? Why or why not?
Does it meet your own requirements? Why or why not? What changes would you make to your government to improve it?
Monarchical governments are inherently evil and, as we’ll see, hereditary monarchies are particularly unjust.
In this chapter, we’ll analyze monarchies as a system of government.
The Bible shows that the distinction of men into kings and their subjects is an evil one. Paine argues that it was “Heathens” who introduced kings into the world, which Jews then took up. However, even though Jews desired to be ruled by kings, it’s clear in the Bible that God does not condone monarchies. In fact, the Bible shows that monarchy is a sin. There are multiple examples of groups of people asking a virtuous man to be their king, which the man then turns down because he doesn’t want to exalt himself above others.
Paine specifically mentions Gideon, a man who the Jews asked to be their king after he freed them from tyranny. He says no, arguing that the only person who should rule over them is God.
Hereditary monarchy represents an even more significant evil, for several reasons:
The closer a government is to a republic, the most just form of government, the less need there is for a king and the less business he has. If the government is a true republic, with authority derived from the people, the king will essentially be legislated out of existence.
In this chapter, we’ll move from philosophical arguments to the situation in front of the American colonists in 1775 and 1776. We’ll discuss arguments for reconciliation with England and why there is a need for revolution.
Reconciliation with England is no longer an option. Now that England has begun to violently oppress America, there is no other option but to fight back. This is a worthy cause because in fighting back, America can establish a republican form of government that is a model for the rest of the world.
There’s been a lot of debate on the topic of America’s relations with England, but the period of debate is over, ended by the actions of the King. It’s time now to fight.
This particular liberation movement is of the greatest possible worth for two reasons:
It’s worth examining the arguments for reconciliation and refuting them:
America’s business has also become too big and complicated to manage from so far away.
Anyone interested in maintaining the relationship with England thus falls into one of these four categories:
It is clear that reconciliation will not happen, and also that if America is well-organized, they can win a victory. Thus, this should happen now and not be left to future generations after more suffering is incurred as the result of being a colony. A continent shouldn’t be ruled by an island—that is exactly against the natural order.
If America chooses not to fight for independence, here is what will happen:
First, the King of England will make things much worse for the colony. He doesn’t want any more potential for rebellion, so order will be much more strict. He will not allow a single law he doesn’t approve of. England is worried first about England. So, every time it’s in England’s interest to suppress America or America’s growth, England will do it. The King will almost certainly re-install himself in the government of America to exert more control.
Second, any kind of agreement will only be temporary, as the colonies continue to grow in size and capability. Instability will persist, and this will discourage any new emigration.
Third, it is very plausible that civil war within the colonies will break out if an agreement is signed. Americans have already suffered so much at the hands of the British—if that freedom is taken away partly by their fellow citizens, their ire will be directed towards said citizens.
Fourth, it is also possible that when a takeover does inevitably occur, it will be led by a conqueror uninterested in republican rule but rather in installing himself as king, leading to continued tyranny. Government can’t be left vacant—a system needs to be created now.
In order to avoid the wars that are common in a monarchical system, in addition to all of the other aforementioned issues with monarchy, the American system should be a republic. To better imagine a future after English rule, we should set down some principles of the future government here:
The rest of the world is overrun with tyranny and oppression. America has the opportunity to stand as a beacon of hope and an asylum. We should take on this challenge.
Think about the pros and cons of Paine’s goals for an ideal government and compare them to what actually happened in America.
What are the similarities and differences between Paine’s proposed Continental Congress and how Congress functions today?
What specific flaws do you see in Paine’s proposed system of government?
How does Paine’s understanding that America can’t reconcile with England fit in with his descriptions of the nature of man and government from earlier in Common Sense?
America has a lot of natural advantages when it comes to the possibility of revolution. There will never be a greater chance of success than there is right now, and if Americans do not seize the opportunity, they leave themselves open to more oppression from England or violent takeover from somewhere else.
In this chapter, we’ll examine these advantages and discuss America’s future and potential.
America has never been in a better place than it is right now to commit to revolution because:
America is also in a great position to start building a navy once it does declare independence, with ample resources and capital available. America will eventually lead the world in ship building, because no power in Europe has the coastline or the internal materials. Furthermore, America does not need to have nearly as many ships as England to establish naval dominance because they don’t have an empire to rule over—they are not stretched so thin. Americans should begin the process of building up their naval fleet now, so as to be protected long into the future.
When other nations did not seize upon their opportunities to form a government, they left themselves open for conquerors and lost the potential to have freedom. America should learn from those mistakes.
A declaration of independence is needed, which should keep in mind these four points:
While other nations may be wary of supporting the American revolutionaries based on their own interests, a free America will be unlikely to engage in too much armed conflict, especially with other republics that will hopefully use the forthcoming model of American governance as a model.
(Shortform note: This section was not in the original version of Common Sense and was published as an addendum after King of England George III gave a speech to parliament on October 26, 1775, the text of which appeared in America in January of 1776, in which he called the American rebels traitors.)
George III’s speech is not of particular concern because he has already proven that he is immoral. It just reinforces the point that America’s relationship with England is beyond reconciliation.
The speech by George III is libelous and is entirely untrue. However, it doesn’t matter much what the King says or does, because he has already broken every moral obligation that he has, and has no conscience left. Thus, it is even more clear that reconciliation is impossible and independence is the only route forward. Because it was distributed separately, Paine uses this document to reiterate much of his argument about the necessity of American independence from England.
There are three ways that independence can be achieved:
(Shortform note: Paine writes a message to the Quakers in an attempt to gain their support for the revolution and explain the guiding principles of peace, despite the necessity of war. He also chastises them for their lack of support. Thomas Paine himself was born into a Quaker family. Most Quakers eventually remained pacifist during the war and refused to support any efforts.)
The Quakers should support the war effort despite their stated pacifism, because it will lead to eternal peace. Quakers aren’t committed to peace just because of their religion, it’s also natural, and the wish of people of all religions. The goal of the pamphlet and of the revolution is peace forever, and this will be impossible without a full break from England. There are multiple reasons why the Quakers should join the war effort:
The principles of Quakerism make the Quakers inoffensive to everyone, including governments that are tyrannical. This makes them helpful to tyrants and makes their statements about wishing to live in a free and fair society not line up with their actions, in which Paine accuses them of choosing profit over their country. America as it is constituted under the tyranny of England does not allow for civil and religious rights.