Customer Reviews

Common Sense

5 star:		(25)
4 star:		(5)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

Thomas Paine's fierce pamphlet is certainly a powerful piece of rhetoric; it is easy to see how his works rallied the colonists to the cause of war.

Paine is on solid ground when he attacks the legitimacy of monarchy as an institution; he skillfully cuts apart monarchist theory, showing how morally bankrupt it is for someone to reign merely because their ancestors won a battle.

Where Paine errs is in his advocacy of violence as means to end British rule. The base of his argument is that since British troops had fired on colonial militias, all legitimacy of the British crown had ended. Furthermore, because human lives had been lost, settling for anything else than full, total, immediate independence would be a "waste" of these casualties.

Here, however, Paine seems to blissfully not care exactly who fires the first shot. If violence by the other side is all that one needs to justify violence -- there will be no end to war! Paine goes on further to reject out of hand any concept of a negotiated settlement with the British, arguing that the British government is a snake that could not be trusted, utterly evil and corrupt.

I suspect, however, that Tory colonists, many of whom later found their homes burned, their possessions stolen, and they themselves brutally tarred and feathered and run out of the country, would apply the same harsh description to the rebels. Paine, however, cares little for Tories, whom he dismisses as traitors, even going so far as to call for their execution. He even encloses a harsh appendix aimed at pacifist Quakers who had advocated an end to the violence.

Furthermore, had Paine's own logic been applied at other times, the blacks of the U.S. South would have been fully justified in taking up arms when policement fired on civil rights marchers. Student protesters against Vietnam could have risen in revolt after the Penn State deaths. One reason neither did so, of course, is because they did not enjoy one advantage Paine boasts of - the advantage of home turf and the ability to outlast the British in a long-term conflict. We should fight, Paine argued, because Britain cannot win a war across an ocean. Accustomed as we are to thinking of Paine as a hero of liberty, is this really all that different from Mao's "freedom flows from the barrel of a gun"?

To say the least, this iconic revolutionary pamphlet is a very interesting document. While some of Paine's arguments ring true; the fallacy behind the existence of a divine monarchy, the lack of coordination by being ruled by a country on the other side of the ocean, the countries with which Great Btritain had declared were to be supposed enemies of the Colonies and that the they were being governed for the good of England and not for the good of the Colonies, there are other arguments that are driven more from the emotion of nationalism rather than objective reasoning. If a malicious act has taken place, is the only plausible reaction that of fighting back militarily? How does Paine know that the Colonies were actually under the 'grace of God'? Was that written somewhere in a Holy Scripture or did God send Paine a direct message? Is religious toleration only the inclusion of additional Christian denominations, as Paine suggests, or is it the embrace of many different religious tenets? Are the Quakers to be chastised, as Paine suggests, because their Christian beliefs do not include violence? If Paine's view of the Colonies as being peaceful in nature, why does he place a great emphasis on the building of a huge naval fleet? If indeed 'all men are created equal' why are the Tories and the Loyalists treated as traitors to humanity? They merely felt that this issue was resolvable by a manner other than a vicious and bloody war. The differences of ideas should never label other people as being traitorous for the differences of opinions is what separates true democracy from crass imitators. Nor should they did create the spectacle of 'tarring and feathering' a person's long-standing neighbors over these differences.

It is interesting to read the writings of a man who strongly professes his Christianity but then has these values immediately overcome by stronger and less rational feelings of nationalism and patriotism! His pamphlet is more of a propaganda piece rather than 'common sense' and more of a call to arms rather than an avenue to international problem solving.

The USA has long been known to have an arrogant, imperialistic and Christian fundamentalist viewpoint. The basis for it goes back to its original founding and is shown in other its initial writings and doctrines. American 'exceptionalism' is a credo that was artificially created during this era and was based on nationalistic emotions rather than objective facts. This fantasy has carried over into present day United States foreign and domestic policies. Canada, a country in a similar circumstance during the early 1800s, in time, peacefully reconciled its differences with Great Britain and become an independent and prosperous nation. By doing it in such a much less aggressive manner, it never embraced the dominance and elitism that is became so prevalent in the USA.

It is easy to see why high school American history teachers simply teach us the propaganda! And how naive we are as 10th graders!

"... let none be heard among us, then those of A GOOD CITIZEN, ANOPEN AND RESOLUTE FRIEND, AND A VIRTUOUS SUPPORTER OF THE RIGHTS OF MANKIND..."

If you don't see the above quote in your copy evidently there are different copies of "Common Sense" with some variances. All have the standard four chapters; additions have other materials... Most of the versions I have come in books marked "Common Sense and other writings by Thomas Payne."

As you read "Common Sense" you'll realize there are several ways you can approach this information. One way is to look at it in the time period that it was written as one of his target readers. Another is to apply it to today's way of life. I actually had chosen as a combination. I also thought that I knew the Bible pretty well but found that I had to look up some quotations that he used.

I'm not going to go into detail as I don't want to spoil the surprise of how well he writes on the subject(s). I will say this is one of those books that you want to read before you die but I prefer to read it early so I can live by what I've read. Also I was surprised as with most people quote things like the Constitution or of the Bill of Rights so forth they always quote the large esoteric statements or concepts and forget tell you that it can get bogged down with tedium. This is not the case of "Common Sense" as almost every one of his sentences as a standalone timeless thought.

Writing a review for this book is a lot like writing a review for The Constitution. It seems as though there are not enough words to describe the majesty of the document.

Many of the founding fathers lacked the educational training that contemporary politicains have received. With that fact in mind, Common Sense is even more potent. Thomas Paine sought to make his fellow colonists join in rebelling against the King and the British. His argument is based in the relative absurdity of being ruled by a king whose power is gained only because of the status of his parents. Even the first king in succession probably only gained his power by being the most brutal ruffian in his gang of conquerers. For those who suggest that the relationship with Britain need not be changed because "it is not broke, so don't fix it", he uses a child that nurses too long from his mother as a metaphor. Paine continues his writing with other choice prose to rationalize independence.

Paine's words were a biting commentary against the King. Even today, these words maintain their potency. No America should live without reading this book which was the reasoning for our break from Britain.

This work of Thomas Paine is at the least a Masterpiece and a very important part of the history of the world. The fury and passion of this work (and his others), are awe inspiring.

Hes truly one of the greatest figures in American and World History, and this work inspired men and women under the rule of a King to rise up and form the greatest nation to ever bless the Earth.

In "Common Sense", Thomas Paine lays out his argument as to why the United States of America should, nay, MUST, declare its independence from Britain. In the traditional vein of revlutionary writers, Paine's pamphlet is a beautiful example of the English language at its most poetic. He states the need for independence best when he says, "The blood of the slain, the weeping voice of nature cries, 'TIS TIME TO PART."
This pamphlet is a must read for anyone interested in American history. Most everyone can recall their US History textbooks mentioning "Common Sense". This pamphlet was first published in 1775 and inspired our Founding Fathers, especially Ben Franklin and Thomas Jefferson. Additionally, anyone who is interested in reading about the history of revolutions in general would do well to read this amazing argument.

Some of the things in society are discouraging. At that time there were discouraging things too. The diffence between now and then is that there were people like Thomas Paine who stood up and did something about it. An extremely inspiring manefesto.

What makes "Common Sense" so compelling, even 225 years after it was published, is Paine's impassioned defense of American independence--a passion bordering on demagoguery. Like all heated arguments, this pamphlet is meant to get the blood boiling, and its anger and righteousness (and humor) make it far more readable than most of the writings by the nation's others founders.

Paine starts with a theory of government and an examination of the moral and political deficiencies of the constitutional monarchy practiced in England. He then proceeds to eviscerate the very idea of monarchy, detailing biblical prescriptions against it (as a response to the concept of the "divine right" of kings) and exposing the very silliness of hereditary kingship as a form of government. While perhaps "the present race of kings in the world have had an honorable origin," in all probability "the first of them [was] nothing better than the principal ruffian of some restless gang, whose savage manners or pre-eminence in subtility obtained him the title of chief among plunderers."

He follows this theoretical background with a summary of the ongoing struggle between the colonies and Britain, followed by an outline of proposals for what form an American government might take. Paine then asserts that "a separation between the countries [will] take place at one time or another" and details the advantages--military, economic, and political--that independence will bring. In an appendix, he argues against the futility of any attempt at reconciliation with the British monarchy.

At the end is attached a strongly worded response to a pamphlet written by John Pemberton on behalf of the Quaker community and opposed to military rebellion. Paine argues that thinly guised neutrality in the name of "peace" is little more than implicit support for military activities by royalist forces, a theme he returns to in the second issue of "The American Crisis." There, he points out that Quaker leaders "are continually harping on the great sin of our bearing arms, but the king of Britain may lay waste the world in blood and famine, and they, poor fallen souls, have nothing to say." Yet, aware perhaps that he may be accused of bigotry, he carefully qualifies this argument in a footnote: "I have ever been careful of charging offences upon whole societies of men. . . . We are certain we have many friends among [the Quakers], and wish to know them."

Paine's parting statement to the Quakers should be required reading for every citizen: "Sincerely wishing, that as men and christians, ye may always fully and uninterruptedly enjoy every civil and religious right; and be, in your turn, the means of securing it to others; but that the example which ye have unwisely set, of mingling religion with politics, may be disavowed and reprobated by every inhabitant of America."

The effect of Paine's monumental work Common Sense on the spirit of the American Revolution can never be measured. This work, originally a pamphlet, inspired and gave courage to the cause of independence, and presented the case for separation from Britain in such a way that it was difficult not to see his point. Paine was a visionary because he recognized that a union between Britain and America could never continue, and that reconciliation (after the conflicts in Boston and other places) would never be possible. This book was read and admired by Washington, Adams, Jefferson, and many other founding fathers, and its precepts did not go unnoticed by these great men.

Today, Paine's thinking is still relevant. His basic thesis that there is a difference between society and government still rings true today. As Paine points out, a society enriches our virtues, but government must restrain our vices. Paine's theory (at the beginning of the work) on the necessity of government, and his idea that the government is best which protects its people at the least possible cost to personal liberty, is just as interesting and inspiring today as it was 225 years ago. This pamphlet is applicable today as well as then because Paine believed that men should be good, and that this was the ultimate principal of successful government. "Of more worth is one honest man to society," he says, "and in the sight of God, than all the crowned ruffians that ever lived." The world would be a better place if we all had a little Common Sense.

This book is an absolute classic of politcal philosophy. Its a quick read and very interesting. You should read this book, period!