Common Sense

The proposal rejecting the English monarch in Common Sense is one of the most motivating historical documents ever written. The call for action and explanations listed in it helped educate and unite the American people. Thomas Paine touched on issues relevant to that time such as comparing and justifying his case in a biblical context. Despite the old English voice, Common Sense illustrates the importance of proposal rhetoric and sets the standard for future comparison.

It is interesting to note that Paine is an advocate for government, but not in monarchy form. He states that it is essential for man's security. This piece is written so well that I wish we still spoke in a similar fashion. To illustrate both points, "Wherefore, security being the true design and end of government, it unanswerably follows that whatever form thereof appears most likely to ensure it to us, with the least expense and greatest benefit, is preferable to all others" (Paine). Security is the design and the people desire this result at the least cost. This still holds true today in our government because the American public demands every liberty given by the smallest amount of political intervention. Our security is the cornerstone of these wants and needs.

In big bold letters, Paine states that the ELECTED should never separate themselves from the wishes of the ELECTOR. Have we forgotten this issue today? That answer can be saved for a future essay, but his point is that leaving this responsibility to a single person, a monarch, is a travesty. One person, one human person can very easily be subject to their own selfish wishes easily losing sight of those of the ELECTOR (especially if he or she was never elected). Divine right may be an absurd notion today, but people in that day really believed that the monarch’s rule was God’s will. Paine attacks this belief on the same religious context, rebutting it.

It is my belief that the people of colonial days respected the value of religion much more than the general public today. The resulting feelings on the subject are irrelevant, but Paine understood this and attacked the reader where he or she would be most attentive. Religious issues in those days usually resulted in someone dying, not just in political groaning. “In the early ages of the world, according to the scripture chronology there were no kings; the consequence of which was, there were no wars; it is the pride of kings which throws mankind into confusion” (Paine). This statement rung through my ears because I did not know that monarchy is a new practice. Also, kings were considered divine but only divinity is without pride. Paine uses religious evidence to persuade the reader to consider a new way of thinking, which is an extremely difficult accomplishment.

In his final two paragraphs, Paine uses relevant and current information to motivate the reader. He brings the issue to their front door forcing them to generate a feeling and a connection on the subject. For example, he states that he has not met a man that does not think that a separation will occur someday; American colonies have governed themselves for years without British rule. In a last example, though there are many more, Paine states that British intervention is motivated by money and not by good intentions, and unfortunately, I don’t know if our democracy has totally cleared up this issue. In his call to action he makes the reader care, most specifically by bringing these issues to their front door step. Common Sense is an excellent proposal and its format is still relevant today.

Common Sense by Thomas Paine