- Dr. Benjamin Franklin (1776, Howard Da Silva)
The above quote isn't actually from the real Dr. Benjamin Franklin. It's a line from the play 1776 which is about the creation and signing of the Declaration of Independence. In the play, John Adams declares that "the people want independence!" and the above quote is Dr. Franklin's reply.
My family watches the movie (based on the play) at least once a year around the 4th of July, we've even seen the play on stage. I grew up in Virginia with all it's colonial and revolutionary history at my finger tips. I've read the "Bill of Rights" and "The Declaration of Independence".
But it wasn't until this year that I got around to reading "Common Sense".
I've been on a "classic" literature kick. Classic being a relative term as what is considered a classic by some people may not actually mean it's any good. Last year I read Machiavelli's The Prince. It was a tough read and I honestly couldn't tell haft the time whether Machiavelli was being serious or sarcastic half the time. Likely, it was a bit of both. It probably would have been easier to get through if I had had a better understanding of Italian history before the 1500s.
"Common Sense" was, thankfully, a lot easier to understand.
What finally got me to actively look for a copy of the pamphlet (which is less than a hundred pages long even with an introduction) was a different play about the history of America: Hamilton. The short work is prominently featured in one of the songs ("The Schuyler Sisters") and it got me curious as to what was actually written.
That and I found a copy of the book for $1.00 at a used bookstore. Score!
After reading the 94 pages (which included a few updates for after "The Declaration of Independence" was written and a scathing letter to a Quaker minster), I could see how it became a best seller of the 1770s. The arguments were compelling and had a basis in historical events and religious teachings (necessary for the time).
There was also some noticeable racism and clear omission of certain groups of people (i.e. the African slaves, women) from his arguments. There were also a lot of references to slavery without actually addressing the institution of slavery within America.
From my modern perspective, Mr. Paine's arguments were sound and understandable as long as you overlooked the things I mentioned in the previous paragraph. However, I could see where his ideas would be considered radical and extreme. The monarchy had ruled Europe with the help of the church for centuries and defying the monarchy was virtually unheard of...
Except, that Great Britain had already gone through radical changes of it's own. One piece of British history, that is occasionally taught in American public schools, is the English civil war which occurred in the middle of the 1600s. The rebels decided that they didn't like Charles I politics, so they got rid of him and his son. It was then that Oliver Cromwell rose to power for about 5 years before dying of natural causes and the British monarchy was eventually restored.
This brief blip of British history is referenced a few times in "Common Sense" as is the Norman invasion in 1066, the history of the Jewish people from the Old Testament, and a bunch of other historical reasons as to why monarchies aren't actually ordained by God. Having some knowledge of these historical and biblical events is helpful while reading the pamphlet and would have been known at the time of it's original publication. These arguments further backed up Mr. Paine's final conclusion: That America should be Independent from Great Britain.
The language in "Common Sense" is also quite inflammatory. It's written in a way that shows that Mr. Paine is completely convinced of his argument and that he has no room for doubt. If there had been even a hint of doubt, it would have derailed the entire piece. I would argue that that's the part of what made it such a hit. Reading the pamphlet, you get the impression that Mr. Paine isn't just trying to convince you he's right, he knows he's right and won't let you leave until you've been convinced he's right too.
The publication of "Common Sense" was incredibly influential for the time and it shows in it's many references to the Independence movement.
Which is what brings me back to the opening quote. The people who read "Common Sense" were often the forefront of the Revolution movement and some of the most vocal in their call for change. (Quick side note: some estimates suggest that only about a third of Americans in the colonies - read white men who owned property - were actually in favor of Independence, the other two thirds were split between the Loyalists and people who were indifferent to the situation at large).
So, should the "Common Sense" be read in schools?
Maybe in a college history or persuasive essay class, but not any sooner than that. Though it's influences can't be denied, the obvious racism and other outdated ideas (especially the ones that aren't as easy to pick out) don't need a platform in our modern society. I think teaching it's influence on the Independence movement is important, but it doesn't have to be read. Or if it is read in schools, to place an emphasis on historical context
Have any of you guys read "Common Sense" or other influential historical document? I'd recommend The Prince, but I've already mentioned that it's a bit difficult without knowing all the historical events it references. I do feel comfortable recommending The Art of War, though. I find that it can be applied to a lot more situations than just the battle field.
Thanks for reading. Maybe I've convinced you to check out "Common Sense" or for you to discard it as another relic of time. I thought it was interesting and helped me take a peak back in time to better understand the great experiment that is The United States of America.
If you enjoyed this post (or it really pissed you off), please like, share, and/or leave a comment. I love hearing from my readers and I hope you guys like hearing from me.
Until next week.
