50bookchallenge #33/50: Common Sense, Thomas Paine

This was anoth­er short one, but the eigh­teenth-cen­tu­ry lan­guage was a lit­tle dif­fi­cult to wade through. With over­com­pli­cat­ed com­pound sen­tences, I got a lit­tle of an idea of what a chore it must be to read my writing.

It was not as rel­e­vant a read as I expect­ed. I guess I’d thought this would be a man­i­festo illu­mi­nat­ing the rights of man, and part of Com­mon Sense did in fact fill that bill. I thought, how­ev­er, that this would be a time­less dec­la­ra­tion of val­ues, in much the same way that the Dec­la­ra­tion of Inde­pen­dence is. What I did­n’t real­ize was how Paine meant to inspire not con­fi­dence or uni­ty but action. Com­mon Sense is an urgent call to take a stand against the British and shake the yoke. What made it a fas­ci­nat­ing read was not its moral sense, but the his­tor­i­cal illu­mi­na­tion it made of the con­cep­tion of our nation.

Almost every plan and every pre­dic­tion Paine makes has come true or close to it. One par­tic­u­lar­ly chill­ing pas­sage, though, is where he rebuts a Tory argu­ment that the Amer­i­can colonies were too young for inde­pen­dence, and that rush­ing into an inde­pen­dent Union would lead to a bloody civ­il war down the road. Of course hind­sight is 20/20, and I think that he was right to say that bow­ing to the rule of a sov­er­eign an ocean away could no longer be with­stood, but how true that no mat­ter how wise­ly the Fed­er­al­ists and the Anti-fed­er­al­ists ham­mered out com­pro­mise the Union would even­tu­al­ly resolve that ques­tion with its own blood.

Also fas­ci­nat­ing is Paine’s use of Bib­li­cal pas­sages to renounce monar­chy. I haven’t checked his ref­er­ences or their con­text, but he makes a case that Kings appeared in the Bible only against the expressed wish of the Almighty.

Oh! And how elo­quent­ly he put it: that in Great Britain the King is the Law, but in Amer­i­ca the law should be king.

Again a reminder that I’ve for­got­ten more Amer­i­can his­to­ry than I know.

2 Replies to “50bookchallenge #33/50: Common Sense, Thomas Paine”

  1. The sad thing about Paine is
    The sad thing about Paine is that, after being such a part of the Amer­i­can Rev­o­lu­tion and then being on the Com­mit­tee of Nine that draft­ed the French Con­sti­tu­tion after their rev­o­lu­tion, when he died he was buried in a pas­ture behind his house with only a few neigh­bors present. His house­keep­er, cog­nizant of the irony, said to her son some­thing to the effect that he rep­re­sent­ed Amer­i­ca’s grat­i­tude, and she France’s.

    Dad

  2. He played a part in bring­ing
    He played a part in bring­ing it on him­self, which I find just as sad. Noth­ing was good enough for him—even a gov­ern­ment mod­eled after his own writ­ing he stormed was sim­ply an imi­ta­tion of Britain. He was a friend of the rev­o­lu­tion, but a bit­ter foe to the form­ing of the Union. I’m not even cer­tain that call­ing him an Anti-Fed­er­al­ist quite cov­ers it; he seems to have been opposed to the Fed­er­al­ists and a greater foe of the Anti-Fed­er­al­ists. He called Wash­ing­ton (and many oth­ers as well) a trai­tor and then became indig­nant when pub­lic opin­ion paint­ed him with the same brush he’d used on the men who car­ried out the rev­o­lu­tion that he aroused.

    Age of Rea­son pur­port­ed­ly has some strong words about Chris­tian­i­ty, and it was John Adams’ vocal con­dem­na­tion of this that real­ly seems to have turned the tide against Paine.

    As for France, well, I won’t com­plain of France in the late 18th Cen­tu­ry being an over­ly ratio­nal place.

    Paine did deserve more thanks, but he made it a point to turn away those who should have thanked him.

Leave a Reply