Common Sense for the common man: Analyzing the strengths of Thomas Paine's rabble rousing document
When Thomas Paine's Common Sense was published in early 1776, American colonists were unsure what they were fighting for. Some wanted to reconcile with King George III, while others were just as eager to break free from Britain's grip. Common Sense argued for independence and would ultimately inspire colonists of all classes to rise up. Paine's work is so effective because it explains how monarchies throw their subjects into useless wars, dispels myths about the office of the king and suggests that reconciliation would be a foolish endeavor.
Paine argues that a monarchy only exposes the colonists to more danger. While England is not an absolute monarchy, in practice, "the will of the king is as much the law of the land" (8). The colonies are subjected to the whims of the king, and must follow suit if he goes to war with another country. Unfortunately for the colonists, France or Spain, who might be willing trading partners one day, must be considered mortal enemies during a time of war. Britain did not "protect us from our enemies on our account, but from her enemies on her own account," (19) Paine says, adding that the colonists were dragged into wars with "those who had no quarrel with us on any other account" (19). These wars bring few, if any benefits to the colonists. Paine says that "whenever a war breaks out between England and any foreign power, the trade of America goes to ruin, because of her connection with England" (22). Thus, Paine builds a case for independence, by suggesting that "it is the pride of kings which throw mankind into confusion" (9) and nations without a king are better off. Indeed, he points out that Holland, which does not have a king "hath enjoyed more peace for this last century than any of the monarchial governments in Europe" (9).
In his argument for independence, Paine says that the office of king itself is based on a series of lies. His main target is the theory of hereditary succession, where one man and his descendents rule a nation in perpetuity. Paine suggests that this method is a "degradation and lessening of ourselves" (12) because "For all men being originally equals, no one by birth could have a right to set up his own family in perpetual preference to all others for ever" (12). Indeed, the king does not descend from a line of benevolent rulers chosen by God, but from a line of thugs. When monarchies started, a king was nothing more than the "principal ruffian of some restless gang, whose savage manners or preeminence in subtlety obtained the title of chief among plunderers" (13) Paine says. While England has seen some good kings, this system has mainly opened "a door to the foolish, the wicked, and the improper" and "hath in it the nature of oppression" (15). Paine also argues that when men are given near-absolute power, it can only lead to misery for their subjects:
Men who look upon themselves born to reign, and others to obey, soon grow insolent; selected from the rest of mankind their minds are early poisoned by importance; and the world they act in differs so materially from the world at large, that they have but little opportunity of knowing its true interests, and when they succeed to the government are frequently the most ignorant and unfit of any throughout the dominions. (14-15)
Paine also spares no words for those who say hereditary succession prevents a nation from civil wars. He calls this idea "the most barefaced falsity ever imposed upon mankind" pointing out that the "whole history of England" includes "eight civil wars and nineteen rebellions" (15). Thus since the office of the king is flawed, America does not need such a ruler. Instead, in a new government independent, Paine has a better idea. The colonists shall be ruled from above, for in America "THE LAW IS KING" (31).
Not only does Common Sense attack the king, it rules out the possibility of reconciliation with Britain. First, Paine says that Britain cannot truly govern the colonies when it is a few thousand miles away. "The business of [governing the colonies] will soon be too weighty, and intricate, to be managed with any tolerable degree of convenience, by a power so distant from us, and so very ignorant of us" (25) Paine says. He points out the inefficiency of waiting "four or five months" (25) for the government to answer a petition and even goes as far to say "there is something very absurd, in supposing a continent to be perpetually governed by an island" (25). Likewise, Paine says that there has never been a better time to fight for independence, as the colonies have never been more united and are full of soldiers who have fought in the recent French and Indian war (40). But Paine's most powerful argument against reconciliation deals with the toll this conflict is taking on the colonies. "[B]ut if the whole continent must take up arms, if every man must be a soldier, it is scarcely worth our while to fight against a contemptible ministry only. Dearly, dearly, do we pay for the repeal of the acts, if that is all we fight for" (26). Likewise, Paine asks colonists to be realistic, saying: "[T]ell me, whether you can hereafter love, honor, and faithfully serve the power that hath carried fire and sword into your land? (23). For Paine, once the first shots were fired at American colonists, there could be no turning back.
Paine's writing style is largely responsible for the success of Common Sense. In a deeply religious country, Paine is quick to invoke scripture in his arguments. He points out when the Israelites asked for a king, it led to their undoing: "THE LORD WILL NOT HEAR YOU THAT DAY" (11), he quotes. Likewise, Paine says that it should be no surprise that humans developed such a wicked form of government because they are sinners at heart. "It unanswerably follows that original sin and hereditary succession are parallels" (14) he writes. But perhaps most importantly, Paine writes in a simple, logical fashion (as opposed to high-minded speech on natural law) that is easy for commoners to understand. By breaking down complex theories of monarchy with humor and logic - since William the Conqueror was French then "England ought to be governed by France" (21) for example - Paine makes it possible for anyone to understand that England should have no right to America. Thus, by the time he dismantles theories of reconciliation, his readers are convinced that choosing independence would not just be the right path for America, but the only path.
1,115 words, 4 pages
|
Home
