Similarities Between Common Sense And Thomas Paine

​Thomas Paine's Common Sense is a seminal piece of American literature and American history; arguably it's the most important piece. Paine wrote Common Sense in 1775-1776, and it's theme was to spread his political beliefs. He wanted American independence from the British monarchy. The pamphlet was anonymously released on January 10th, 1776, and it explained to the reader why the colonies needed to rebel against their British oppressors. It was sold far and wide across the colonies, and it was successful; it inspired many of the soldiers during the initial summer of rebellion in 1776. The whole idea of the pamphlet revolves around persuading the reader to side with the rebels in their valiant fight for independence, and he absolutely uses contemporary persuasive techniques in his writing. He uses facts about the present, he looks towards the future, and he uses religion to persuade his readers. In fact, it's a testament to how the act of persuasion has been very similar over the last 238

Paine blatantly states in the pamphlet of Common Sense that monarchy is disapproved by nature, that oppression encompasses the entire space of the old world. He further showed that being in the membership of the British empire was creating burdens and conflicts with other countries, and with gaining independence, America could escape the endless regal wars of

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).

In the previous paragraph, although Paine talked about the flaws that come into play in a government that is run by a single ruler, he then talked about how having a ruler may be inevitable and provides an example of how it may work. Though Paine doesn't argue against having a ruler to the fullest extent due to the amount of oppressive that is seen through having single rulers, he feels that there should be someone in charge but have equal power with other parties, therefore that single person isn't in complete control. According to Paine, " Let the assemblies be annual, with a President only. The representation more equal. Their business wholly domestic, and subject to the authority of a Continental Congress." This shows Paine's thinking on producing a government with equality. In this example, there will be representation from all aspects and people, so they can and will be part of the decision-making as well as the President. Thomas Paine's theory on creating a government with a higher power which is surrounded by equality can flourish due to the elimination of oppression, tyranny, and abuse of power.

During the late 1700's, the colonies and their mother country, Great Britain, were butting heads with immense taxation and the unreasonable laws England placed on the colonies. Thomas Paine was a journalist at the time and published one of his famous works "Common Sense" in 1776. The pamphlet was intended to challenge the British government authority that was overruling the colonial power. The arguments Paine states in Common Sense became some of the deciding factors of the colonies breaking away from Great Britain.

The Tea Act of 1773 was put in place to help a failing company called the East India Company by not charging them any tax on tea. The result of the Act was that it gave that company a monopoly on tea. The British government did not think this would cause any issues with the colonists because it would make the cost of tea go down. (Document 4) East India Company sailed into many ports to import their tea, including

On April 27, 1773, the British Parliament passed the Tea Act, which was supposed to, as History’s article, “Tea Act,” states, “was not to raise revenue from the colonies but to bail out the floundering East India Company, a key actor in the British economy.” The colonists viewed the Act as another example of the British Parliament abusing taxation. To further express the colonists’ hatred towards the Tea Act, John Green explains in his YouTube video, “Taxes & Smuggling - Prelude to Revolution: Crash Course US History #6,” that “Some colonists were upset that cheap tea would cut into the profits of smugglers and established tea merchants, but most were just angry on principle.” At the time, tea was just as equally an important beverage to both the colonists and the British, and having the British tax the tea showed

They formed many groups and executed riots to protest against this serious disregard of human rights and pride. One way they combated this crude injustice was The Boston Tea Party. At this time, Britain was taxing America’s tea heavily, an imposition that the colonists did not agree to. Rebels involved were members of The Sons of Liberty, colonists vying for freedom and individual rights. The rebels dressed as Native Americans and stormed an incoming boat carrying a fresh load of tea. They dumped the tea into the Boston Harbor as a form of protest; a refusal to pay Britain’s taxes. John Adam, in The Boston Tea Party (Doc. 2) concludes that Britain’s actions have created a much larger and public form of protest. More rebels were coming out into the open as the revolution gains momentum. This proves that the taxation aggravated the colonists as the abuse accumulated, urging them towards rebellion. Colonists also took up tarring as a form of discipline as a response to taxes created during the Stamp Acts. Angry Americans poured hot tar over tax collectors and covered them in feathers to express their displeasure at the imposed taxes. Those fortunate enough to avoid this public humiliation fled or became too scared to go about their collecting duties. In a letter from John Hancock regarding the Stamp Act (Doc. 4), he stresses that these taxes wrongly pressed upon them didn’t have to be

At the time tea was the most popular non-alcoholic drink in the world, and consequently, was highly taxed. All tea which was being sent to America was first shipped through England. By the time the tea made it to America, the price was through the roof. In response to the high price of tea, many merchants began smuggling the tea into America and selling it at a discounted price to the colonists. This system worked well until the Tea Act was passed. The Tea Act lowered the import tax on tea, and imposed a small tax on the tea itself. Unfortunately, the colonists did not react as well as the English hoped. Merchants felt threatened by the tax as many of their businesses relied on smuggled tea to turn a profit. The colonists also reacted negatively, believing that Britain was unfairly imposing a tax which they had to right to impose. In retaliation, American colonists dressed as Indians and dumped 342 chests of tea from British merchant ships into Boston Harbour, and again, nine days later in Delaware, colonists dumped over 700 chests. The British, rightly outraged by the actions of the colonists, imposed the Coercive Acts: 1) the King closed Boston Harbour until all the dumped tea was payed for, 2) the Massachusetts charter was annulled, and the governor council was reappointed by the King, 3) the Quartering Act required homeowners

The act angered colonial merchants because it only allowed tea to be bought from the East India Company. The issue of “taxation without representation” occurred and was felt even more than before. The colonist and merchants felt that the tax was unconstitutional and boycotted the tea. “...the tea boycott mobilized large segments of the population.” [ The Unfinished Nation, Alan Brinkley pg.102]. This highlights how the colonies were coming together against the British and the mistreatment they have

The Townshend Acts were a series of acts named after Charles Townshend, that were passed by the British in 1767. The act placed a tax on all goods that the colonies imported from Britain. Some of these taxed goods were glass, paint, paper and tea. Charles Townshend believed that the bad behavior of the colonists made it more important to keep an army in the colonies. Because of that, he proposed the Townshend Acts to the Parliament.

The American colonists in the ports of Boston, New York, Philadelphia and Charleston had time to consider the implications and impact of the Tea Act before the ships laden with tea arrived in their harbors. They had time to plan their responses and what action they could take against the Tea Act: The press became more active in its political discussions, Circulars and handbills were printed and distributed, The Sons of Liberty organized public demonstration against the British government, Public meetings were held - everyone got to hear about the Tea Act resulting in strong Anti-British attitudes. Americans decided they would continue to boycott tea from the British. To enforce the Nonimportation Agreements by merchants not to purchase British goods. A public meeting was held in Philadelphia and there was agreement that anyone who aided in “unloading, receiving, or vending” the tea was an enemy to his country. The colonists agreed that the Consignees, who were supposed to receive the tea, should “resign their appointment”. The Sons of Liberty reorganized and owners and occupants of stores were warned against harboring the tea, and all who bought, sold or handled it, were threatened as enemies to the

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.

Common Sense, by Thomas Paine, is a major document of American history written between 1775-76. In this, Paine argues for the independence of the colonies. He begins his argument with general reflections about government and religion. He then specifies issues that dealt with the colonies.