The Republic — Common Sense or Not

"For as in absolute governments the King is law, so in free countries the law ought to be King; and there ought to be no other." (Liberty Fund)

Author, Thomas Paine

Thomas Paine was not a polished statesman with a plantation and a pedigree. He was an English-born corset maker, excise officer, and struggling writer who arrived in Philadelphia in 1774 with a letter of introduction from Benjamin Franklin—and an instinct for plain speech. (HISTORY)

In January of 1776, as the colonies wavered between reconciliation and rupture, Paine published a short pamphlet with an audacious title: Common Sense. What Paine understood—better than many educated gentlemen of his time—was that revolutions begin when ordinary people decide that what once seemed “normal” has become intolerable. (House History Archives)

Why Common Sense landed like a cannon shot

Paine didn’t offer colonial Americans a technical brief. He gave them a moral permission slip.

He argued that hereditary monarchy was not merely inconvenient, it was absurd. He pushed readers to stop thinking of independence as reckless and start thinking of it as responsible. And he wrote in language that could be read aloud in taverns and churches and understood by people who had never read Locke.

The result was one of the most explosive publishing events in American history: Common Sense spread rapidly, shifting public sentiment toward independence and helping make the Declaration of Independence thinkable—then inevitable. Estimates of sales and circulation vary, but historians broadly agree it was read far beyond the number of paid copies because it was shared and performed publicly.

The deeper idea: a republic can’t worship a man

The quote that still stings—“In America the law is king”—is not a slogan. It is a constitutional ethic. (Liberty Fund)

Paine’s target was monarchy, but his warning applies to any political culture tempted to personal rule. If a people begin to treat a leader as the embodiment of the nation, the law becomes optional—something to be wielded against enemies and waived for friends. That is not self-government. That is submission with applause.

America’s “grand experiment” is not that we found perfect leaders. It is that we built a system that assumes leaders will be imperfect—and binds them anyway: separation of powers, checks and balances, elections, courts, and the rule of law.

Common Sense for today’s political stress test

We are approaching 250 years since Paine lit the fuse. That anniversary is not a nostalgia opportunity; it’s a diagnostic.

Here are three ways Common Sense speaks into our present moment:

1) Stop confusing tribal loyalty with patriotism.Paine didn’t ask colonists to love rebellion for its own sake. He asked them to love the principle of self-rule more than the comfort of the familiar. Today, our equivalent choice is whether we love constitutional democracy more than we love winning.

2) The legitimacy of government rests on consent—and restraint.A democratic state cannot ask citizens for obedience while treating accountability as optional. When officials demand trust but resist transparency, “common sense” should kick in: power that cannot be questioned will eventually be abused.

3) A republic requires citizens who can say “no” to their own side.Paine’s clarity wasn’t just anti-British; it was anti-idolatry. The modern version is refusing to excuse lies, political violence, corruption, or dehumanization because the culprit wears your jersey.

The uncomfortable question Paine forces on us

If Common Sense were published today, it would not be a pamphlet about red vs. blue. It would be an indictment of the ways we’ve normalized what a free people should never normalize:

• contempt as entertainment

• misinformation as strategy

• threats as rhetoric

• loyalty tests as civic virtue

• and the steady relocation of authority from institutions to personalities

• 
  

Paine’s genius was not that he predicted our time. It’s that he named a permanent temptation: when fear rises, people reach for a strongman; when uncertainty spreads, they reach for a story; when politics feels existential, they start granting “their” leader exemptions from moral and legal limits.

That is the precise moment when common sense is most needed—and most likely to be suppressed.

What citizens can do now

If you want a practical, Paine-like standard for 2026, try this:

1. Ask one question before you share a claim: Is it true—and how would I know?

2. Refuse the “exemption impulse”: if you would condemn it in the other party, condemn it here.

3. Defend the boring safeguards: courts, inspectors general, independent journalism, election administration—these are the load-bearing beams.

4. Practice anti-idolatry: praise leaders for lawful, restrained conduct—not for domination.

5. Vote like a custodian, not a fan: choose outcomes, yes—but also character, competence, and constitutional limits.

   
   

A closing thought...

Paine did not write Common Sense to make people feel righteous. He wrote it to make them feel responsible.

A constitutional democracy survives on a simple, demanding creed: no one is above the law, especially the people we admire. If we lose that, the experiment doesn’t end with a bang. It ends with citizens slowly surrendering the habits that made self-rule possible in the first place.

So: Common Sense or not? The answer is less about what “they” do. It’s about what we will tolerate—and what we will insist upon—as the custodians of a 250-year-old republic. (Liberty Fund)