‘Common Sense’ by Thomas Paine

This winter marks the two hundred and fiftieth anniversary of the publication in America of this highly influential little book which became a best seller and is credited with moving public opinion decisively in favour of independence rather than accommodation with Great Britain.

In January 1776 what would later become a full blown American War of Independence had started, but was in its early stages. Victory was by no means certain and a lot of blood had already been shed at Bunker Hill particularly. No declaration of independence had yet been made, and many (if not most) in the thirteen colonies were very much hoping, and indeed assuming, that the result of their rebellion would be a new settlement with the government in London.

They wanted full restoration self-government and the repeal of some taxes, but still considered themselves to be British subjects. In the summer of 1775 Congress had issued its ‘Olive Branch Petition’ which had, with what appeared extraordinary stupidity in hindsight, been rejected by George III and his ministers. Militarily things were at something of a stalemate as Britain had yet to mobilise a serious force to suppress the nascent rebellion.

Thomas Paine was a recent emigrant to Philadelphia. He was thirty seven when he had arrived from England in November 1774 with some letters of introduction provided by Benjamin Franklin, at that time resident in London. He had become seriously sick from typhus on his ship, but survived and rapidly established himself as a radically-minded journalist able to draw on first-hand knowledge of London politics.

‘Common Sense’ was his first major publication and it sold like hotcakes – 150,000 copies being bought by some calculations. Many were read by multiple people, while passages were read out loud to gatherings in taverns, town halls and some churches. While it dealt with some quite complex ideas, it was written in a plain and engaging style and could thus be readily understood irrespective of well-educated a reader might be. Of course it rather simplified matters, but it caught its moment perfectly, clarified issues, swayed opinion and hence helped make the Declaration of Independence later in 1776 politically possible. It paved the way.

More a campaigning pamphlet than a book, ‘Common Sense’ presents a very well-structured argument for American independence, taking the reader through stage by stage. Paine starts by questioning the legitimacy of hereditary monarchy as a form of government, going on to deny that Britain has any interest in protecting the welfare of its American colonies. He argues that the possibility of any just reconciliation with Britain is a pipedream and suggests that Americans will be dragged into participating in and helping to pay for British military escapades that have nothing to do with them if they do not seize independence. It moves on to put a strong economic case for the capacity of a union of independent states to thrive, free of debt and fantastically placed to exploit abundant natural resources. The final section is a robust defence of republican and democratic forms of government, which Paine argues can be just as stable and effective as traditional monarchies.

What I found surprising when reading this work, given that Paine would later take up a position in favour of Deism and against Christianity, is the extent to which he deploys theological arguments to support the arguments he deploys. Whether or not, by this stage he personally doubted their salience, he clearly knew his audience and understood that this was the only way to persuade the average person of his case.

The other notable feature of the argument Paine presents in Common Sense is less unexpected, but still striking in its simplicity and clarity. He goes back to first principles, arguing that monarchy jars with the original state of mankind. We are born free and equal, but naturally feel a need to co-operate with one another in societies. Government should therefore be consensual and carried out by those who are most able to rule effectively in the common interest. But this is not what happens in practice. Government by hereditary monarchs means that inappropriately qualified people get to exercise power and this inevitably leads to incompetence and corruption.

‘Common Sense’ was not thus only important politically. It was also important philosophically because it is infused with values and modes of thinking that were not so common at this time, but gaining traction. It is a classic product of the late eighteenth century enlightenment, in that it deploys rational and religious arguments together in support of a proposition. The religious argument is there, but does not dominate the whole.