How did Thomas Paine's "Common Sense" shape the American Revolution?

Learn this with friends

History & humanitiesConstitution 1013:013 check-ins

About this video

The historian explains how Thomas Paine's pamphlet Common Sense, written in early 1776, argued that the colonies were already at war and should stop hoping for reconciliation. Paine claimed the British distinction between absolute and constitutional monarchy was false: any monarchy will seek absolute power, as the Coercive Acts showed, so liberty required independence and a republican government with no king or House of Lords. The pamphlet sold enormously, though republics were seen as risky experiments that had never lasted.

You'll be able to

  • summarize Thomas Paine's main arguments in Common Sense.
  • explain why Paine thought monarchy itself was a threat to liberty.
  • explain why a republic seemed like a risky experiment in 1776.

Key words

Common Sense
A 1776 pamphlet by Thomas Paine arguing for American independence and a republic.
Pamphlet
A short printed booklet used to spread an argument.
Absolutist monarchy
A monarchy where the ruler claims unlimited power, like France's.
Constitutional monarchy
A monarchy limited by laws and rights, as Britain claimed to be.
Republican government
A government with no king, where leaders are elected by the people.
Transcript

Thomas Paine writes what becomes the most critical path would go back 1776. He writes it in gen. He's one of the people who's still saying, there are people in the SEC understanding or the peaceful affords. Essentially his army has a number of arguments of common sense. But his first is, what are you crazy to think about? What has been shared? We are at war. Let's just forget about leaving school. When should, the more important thing he says, the British liberty hypo means has always been ashamed. Fundamental nutrition. Understand, he says there's a distinction between any monitoring. You say the French have an absolutist monarchy and the goodness of enumerated constitutional monarchy. Well,

that's cool. We've now seen with monarchy is always going to seek to be absolutely, no matter what you call them on equal footing with the Coercive Acts. The only way that we can preserve liberty, he says, is by realizing that monarchy itself as an institution and nef mu2 opposed to fundamentally a threat to the idea. His pamphlet was falling for not just simply independence from Britain, independence from things which independent from the structures of government and a call for remember that any Pinnacle, a charity, royal, kings without a House of Lords, what we would call a republican government, entirely elected. Now this pamphlet cells with downgrading the number a little bit in this law should stick probably sell

about 60,000 poppies at a time when other vessel and packaging give yourself a little over 5,000. It's almost certainly the case that every single person even read or hadn't read to them on the sets. But something a lot of people don't know. Remember Thomas Hutchison is the governor of Massachusetts and is determined to enforce the Coercive Acts. His people had come over in the 16 burdens. If you've heard of Anne Hutchinson or the famous conflict, that's his answers. Thomas Paine left England in 1773 and Jamie, formula, environment for tuning. In many ways it's not about longevity and colonial America. It's about where you stand and these big grand constitutional questions. What pain and other people like him are saying is that

in the end, if I'm careful that we used to think of it as British liberty, you have to realize that only that Britain is the biggest threat to it, but the very structure of voluntary governance, particular form of monarchy [inaudible]. That if we're going to preserve liberty, we can't in fact nucleate independent colonial America any of those structures. Now we are going to need to figure out a way to have organized, meaningful hearing shoveling. Now that's another whole hour conversation because your publics are seen as the most unstable when the craziest and the most unlikely of experiments, they've never worked at all. It's collapsed into chaos and anarchy.

They have typical choices. Everything they've known before isn't working. The only possibly going to pull in something they've never has worked with. How are they going to make it more? Dana's ideas that the people have ideas and we're still trying to figure out

Video © Khan Academy, used under CC BY-NC-SA. Watch on Khan Academy. Puzzicle is not affiliated with Khan Academy.