What is the Point of Government? First Read: Common Sense by Thomas Paine
* This is a repost of a substack article by Julie Hamill originally published here.
Note: Reading and understanding Thomas Paine requires a few passes. If you fall asleep the first time you read it, you’re not alone and you are not stupid. You can find Common Sense online for free, or buy your own copy.
The last few years revealed stark differences in philosophy regarding the role of government in our society. When the level of fear was high, people were more inclined to submit to onerous mandates. They believed restricting freedom was necessary for the common good and saw the government as a benevolent savior. It was terrifying to watch.
Some people want the government to control as much as possible.
This led me to an existential question: What is the point of government?
A Mini History Lesson on the American Revolution
There is so much fascinating history to discuss that I could spend days writing about what preceded American Independence. But the point here is to get down to the founding documents and develop a basic understanding of what they mean and how our government is supposed to function. So, here’s a very abbreviated history lesson before we get into Common Sense. I recommend listening to “You’ll Be Back” while reading.
By the time Common Sense was published in January 1776, rebellion against the monarchy had been underway for years. Tensions had been building between the British colonies in America and the monarchy abroad, which sought increased control over and extraction of taxes from its American subjects. American colonists banded together to protest their lack of representation and loss of rights. Disputes between colonists and the British escalated to violence.
The First Continental Congress convened in 1774, prompted by Britain’s Intolerable Acts, passed in early 1774 to reassert dominance over the colonies following the Boston Tea Party. The Intolerable Acts closed off the Boston Port, rescinded the Massachusetts Charter, and eliminated self-governance and rights that Massachusetts had enjoyed since its founding. In response, the Continental Congress hatched a plan to boycott British goods unless and until the Intolerable Acts were repealed.
Having failed to convince the King to repeal the Intolerable Acts, the colonists convened a Second Continental Congress in May 1775. The Second Continental Congress was comprised of two main factions: conservatives (who favored reconciliation with Britain) and radicals (who favored independence). Their first act was to create an army to defend not just New England, but all of the British colonies on the continent of North America.
Around this time, a man named Thomas Paine wanted to persuade Americans to support independence from the British monarchy instead of reconciliation, and to establish a new form of government that reflected the will of the people.
He published a pamphlet called “Common Sense.”
“The Object for Attention is the DOCTRINE ITSELF, not the MAN.”
Paine published Common Sense anonymously to avoid personal attacks and get people to focus on the message (the opposite of today’s identity politics):
“In the following sheets, the author hath studiously avoided every thing which is personal among ourselves. Compliments as well as censure to individuals make no part thereof. The wise, and the worthy, need not the triumph of a pamphlet; and those whose sentiments are injudicious, or unfriendly, will cease of themselves unless too much pains are bestowed upon their conversion.” — Common Sense, Introduction
In other words, Paine removed ego and personal politics from Common Sense in order to ensure the message was heard by all, regardless of political persuasion.
Paine knew that attaching his name to the pamphlet might cause people to prejudge its contents, much like someone might prejudge a news report on CNN or Fox, or a policy proposed by Ilhan Omar or Marjorie Taylor Greene. By making the pamphlet anonymous, readers could focus on its contents and message instead of the person behind it. (HOW REFRESHING!)
Government Is a Necessary Evil to Provide Freedom and Security
Paine began the first section of Common Sense, “Of the Origin and Design of Government in General, with Concise Remarks on the English Constitution” by describing government as being separate from society, and in its best state a “necessary evil.”
“Society is produced by our wants, and government by our wickedness; the former promotes our happiness positively by uniting our affections, the latter negatively by restraining our vices. The one encourages intercourse, the other creates distinctions. The first a patron, the last a punisher.”
Paine described the purpose of government as providing for freedom and security.
“Here then is the origin and rise of government; namely, a mode rendered necessary by the inability of moral virtue to govern the world; here too is the design and end of government, viz. freedom and security.”
Advocating for a Constitutional Republic
It’s in this first section that Paine lays out the concept of a constitutional republic. He explains that as a colony grows and spreads, the public concerns will increase, and it will become too inconvenient for all inhabitants to meet regularly to discuss their public concerns. Paine described the convenience of consenting to allow a select number chosen from the group to manage legislative decisions, with those select few having the same concerns as those who have appointed them. The expectation was that those select few would act in the same manner as the whole body would act if they were present.
This is what our state legislators and members of Congress are supposed to do. However, in today’s political reality, our elected legislators don’t actually have the same concerns as us, and they do not act in the same manner as we would if we were all gathered together. Members of Congress spend most of their time dialing for dollars and responding to the needs of their donors. Their donors are, on the whole, not individual people but special interest groups, unions, businesses, law firms, “dark money” PACs, even foreign countries.
Check out Open Secrets and Follow the Money to see who your elected representatives work for.
Paine describes how it is supposed to work:
“If the colony continues increasing, it will become necessary to augment the number of the representatives, and that the interest of every part of the colony may be attended to, it will be found best to divide the whole into convenient parts, each part sending its proper number; and that the elected might never form to themselves an interest separate from the electors, prudence will point out the propriety of having elections often; because as the elected might by that means return and mix again with the general body of the electors in a few months, their fidelity to the public will be secured by the prudent reflection of not making a rod for themselves. And as this frequent interchange will establish a common interest with every part of the community, they will mutually and naturally support each other, and on this (not on the unmeaning name of king) depends the strength of government, and the happiness of the governed. (Emphasis added).
Read that again as many times as you need to understand what Paine is saying. The point of having a constitutional republic with frequent elections is to ensure that this government by the people and for the people actually reflects the will of the people, and not a separate interest. Unfortunately, I think it is evident that we have failed to carry out this objective in America.
Paine believed that frequent elections would mean that no one becomes a lifelong politician separated from the interests of the electorate. Unfortunately, in practice now it’s incredibly difficult to vote out an incumbent due to name recognition and financial backing. We’re watching Senators and Congressmen die in office after holding a seat for decades. People in Congress tend not to reintegrate into plebeian society after getting elected. They tend to go through the revolving door of lobbying the government, again advancing special interests rather than the concerns of the electors.
I’ve already written too much and haven’t even gotten all the way through Paine’s description of the ideal form of government, so this is going to require another post. Stay tuned for Paine’s excoriation of loyalist supporters of reconciliation: interested men, weak men, prejudiced men and moderate men.
