Thomas Paine's Common Sense Essay

Thomas Paine believed that the selection of Kings was unnatural because people are born into being Kings and nothing assures that the person will be a good leader. Just because your father was a good leader does not mean that you will be one. Paine states that nature would disapprove it, and that we should not give mankind “an ass for a lion”1. He says that when we were created we were all created equal. The British had so much control no one could do anything about it. They could not overcome the government and it made the colonists feel useless. This is exactly why Paine criticized the monarchial government because they were indeed doing everything unfairly and doing it only to benefit themselves.

1. The problems that Thomas Paine sees with the British monarchy involve its straying from ideal government, the unjust placement of one individual above all others, and its hereditary aspect. The problems that Thomas Paine sees with King George III in particular are his personal transgressions against liberty. Thomas Paine, firstly views government as “but a necessary evil” (15), and therefore it should be both as limited as possible and also tied to the more positive society. The ideal form of government, thus according to Paine, is a simple republic where the elected are forced to be accountable to their electors (16). The British monarchy fails in all accounts; not only does the prescence of a monarchy at all eliminate the accountability of a republic, but the complicatedness of the British monarchy system makes it worse in this aspect than even other monarchies. Although absolute monarchies are horrid in that they give no power to the people, they are still simpler than the British monarchy; this makes issues much more difficult to handle in the British monarchy (17). The other problems that Paine has with the British monarchy apply to monarchies at large. Paine argues that the placement of one person above all others is an unnatural divide; there is no explanation for the division of people into “KINGS and SUBJECTS” (22) such as there are in other forms of division that humans live with. If it does not make sense to place one individual above all others, then such should most certainly not be law; therefore, from this logic, monarchy, which is entirely based on the principle of placing one person (and their relatives) above all others, is an invalid and unnatural form of government. Of course, some people could, arguably, have earned the admiration and respect of their peers through important action, and thus be deserving of a leadership position. In a republic, by listening to their electors, the elected earn their right to lead. However, the hereditary monarchy removes this earning of the right to lead, and Paine takes issue with that. There is no guarantee that the descendants of a good leader will also be good leaders, and therefore the government of a country should never be left to heredity (29).

It claims all monarchs are despots, cut off from their people and craving for absolute power.  “Male and female are the distinctions of nature,” Paine wrote, “good and bad the distinctions of heaven; but how a race of men came into the world so exalted above the rest . . . is worth enquiring into” (Paine 9).  Government is a necessary evil, a “badge of lost innocence,” that tends to get in the way of civilized society.  Modern civilizations should organize themselves into local, self-governing societies with only representational government, suggested Paine, not an all-powerful monarch. “Of more worth is one honest man to society, and in the sight of God, than all the crowned ruffians that ever lived” (Paine 17).

Paine initially expounded on the connection between society and government and how a government's viability could be judged just on its capacity to ensure the freedom and property of its citizens. He contended that the legislature laid out in the English constitution neglected this.

Paine’s view of human nature and the need for government is that government is needed to keep people, who against their morals, in order. Paine believes that it is human nature tend to not do the right thing and go against their morals. If there was no government, Paine believes the society will fall apart. Therefore, the government is essential for survival of the society as long as it follows the ideas of the people.

Thomas Paine was responsible for some of the most influential works of the revolution. Paine’s pamphlet Common Sense was a very crucial part to America and its movement of independence from Britain. Paine was effective with his writings by being very plain. He wanted both farmers and officials to understand what he was talking about and be able to comprehend his ideas. Paine wanted to put his ideas out to the people of the American colonies so that they could understand it just by reading and not have to analyze and decipher what he was really trying to get across. He wanted to let the colonist know that there was no more room for talking about a split from English rule but it was time for the colonies to unite and take up arms against their British oppressors.

Paine did this through his publication of “Common Sense”. In this periodical, Paine spoke in simple English so that colonists from different places with different literacy levels could understand him. One of Paine’s main points was that Britain’s government was corrupt and that Americans were being oppressed while being controlled by this government. Paine believed that “thirst for absolute power is the natural disease of monarchy,” (Paine 1.17) as well as “the property of no man is secure,” (Paine A.16). Paine saw what the British were doing, and he believed that corruption and a lust for power oppressed other individual’s rights.

Expressing Paine’s views that a revolution was inevitable due to a number of insurmountable problems, written in a way that his audience, everyday colonial Americans, could understand. He expresses his ultimate view that “The authority of Great Britain over this continent is a form of government which sooner or later must have and end (Paine 25)” and that end is

When he stated, “In England a king hath little more to do than to make war and give away places; which in plain terms, is to impoverish the nation and set it together by the ears.” it showed both of his objectives in just one sentence (Paine). It showed how destructive and non-pure a monarchy is because all it does is fight and take over other areas, but at the same time it shows how much the colonists need to claim their independence or else they will be in possession of a radical government. Thomas Paine also stated, “For it is the republican and not the monarchical part of the constitution of England which Englishmen glory in, viz. the liberty of choosing an house of commons from out of their own body—and it is easy to see that when republican virtue fails, slavery ensues.” (Paine). This means that the democratic republic is perfect in his opinion but it can’t be perfect when the leader is a monarchy with a king. His use of this simple information allows the common people to understand what he is trying to portray and makes them think the same way he is. Paine’s use of simplicity along with persuasive arguments pushed his views towards people and would eventually lead to the fight for independence in the Revolutionary

Thomas Paine states his ideas for the government in his Common Sense written in 1776. Paine states that America should not have a king. The first king might be great but then ruling by divine right usually ends up with the people having terrible kings. Once a monarch is put into place it becomes extremely hard to remove. Today in America we still do not have kings which is very good for America. The democracy system that we have in place gives Americans many rights and overall good country to live in unlike 3rd world countries. Paine brings up the point that most subjects under a king do not revolt do to fear and superstition. This made me wonder why they would fear. The subjects would outnumber the royalty and their guards if they would all stand together.

Common Sense was a pamphlet written at the time of growing turmoil within the colonies. Written by author and political activist Thomas Paine, Common Sense was one of the first published attacks on the British monarchy and empire controlling the colonies. The Thirteen Colonies at the time of the American Revolution were stuck between the Patriot and Loyalist parties. Patriots wanted independence from a Great Britain’s tyrannical government and Loyalists wished to remain loyal to the British crown because they thought Patriots were troublemakers who were going to bring an end to the king’s rule in the colonies. Being one of our Republican founding fathers and wishing to detach from Great Britain, Thomas Paine wrote Common Sense in attempts to

Thomas Paine seemed to be a man who was embittered from all the failures of his life. I think he was very angry early in life due to his inability to hold a position as a sailor, government tax collector, or as a schoolteacher, most likely due to his seemingly opinionated nature. “Common Sense” was one of the things he was best known for since it added to the fire of the revolution and roused people against British attempts at peace. As for what he writes about in “Common Sense,” I agree with it. Society is a place where most people find pleasure and government is the restriction of that. Government acts as a structure that keeps things in line with the law and keeps anarchy from breaking out but used inappropriately it can be a vice against men. In reference to structure of government in Britain he remarks ,”the palaces of kings are

Thomas Paine was opposed to monarchy, on the grounds that monarchs are illegitimate, and that the practice is sinful, wrong, and ultimately ineffective at governing states.

Burke also argued against natural rights and explained a custom and practice that develops relation between the government and people. Paine believed in equality and criticised the monarch being chosen by the hereditary succession and by the choice of the people. He wanted the British Constitution to be written because he saw it as not right, and it was brought in during the Glorious Revolution in 1688.