Independent Governance in Thomas Paine\'s

¶ … Independent Governance in Thomas Paine's "The Common Sense" and James Madison's "Federalist No. 10"

American Independence & Political Thought in 18th century America

The eighteenth century of human history is a period where America had rightfully attained its independence from Britain. Following the American Revolution, the independence and liberalization of American society spurred feelings of patriotism and nationalism; hence there is clamor among the country's citizens to begin establishing America as a nation and state.

In the process of nation-building, two important statesmen of the country had significantly contributed to the development of the notion of independence and establishment of democracy in America. James Madison, the fourth president of the United States, has been an active statesman and one of the framers of the U.S. Constitution. He was also known for pushing forth his position to adopt a republican government as the country is taking its initial steps towards nation-building; his political thoughts and ideas were widely published through the publication, "The Federalist." Thomas Paine, meanwhile, was well-known for his ground-breaking ideas concerning independence from Britain and democracy in America, as elucidated in his seminal work, "The Common Sense."

It is evident that both Madison and Paine advocated for American independence from British rule. However, despite their agreement on the right of the country to become independent from Britain, it is apparent in their writings that Madison and Paine have different notions of how independence should be exercised and what form of democracy must be adopted by the new nation-state. In the texts that follow, a discussion and analysis of the differences between the two authors' concepts of freedom and democracy are discussed using "Federalist #10" by Madison and "The Common Sense" as references used for the analysis.

In "The Common Sense," Paine once again brings into his discussion why it is important for America to gain independence from Britain. The essay, entitled, the Colonies Should be Independent from Britain, he discusses how freedom will be curtailed if America was to remain under the rule of Britain. His first point centers on the subjugation of Americans to the Britain's monarch, the King. He has consistently argued in "The Common Sense" that Britain's King is unfit for governance and will not rule wisely mainly because he does not experience the hardships and injustices that society experiences everyday. His second point brings into lucidity his own idea of independence for the country -- that which comprises a "Continental form of government," a government that is truly the nation's own. Paine explains: "A government of our own is our natural right: and when a man seriously reflects on the precariousness of human affairs, he will become convinced, that it is infinitely wiser and safer, to form a constitution of our own..."

His concept of independence as a nation-state is no different from people's common notion of independence of the individual as a human being's natural right. Each American has the natural right to be free; and so, upon the creation of a nation in America, the country itself attains 'collective independence.' Paine speaks of independence in the purest and natural sense, where every individual shall actively participate in the process of nation-building of a newly-independent America.

While Madison shares Paine's argument that independence should be given to America, his was an altogether different kind of independence. He firmly believes that the American nation should have representative or a "minority" who will govern the political and state affairs of the country for the civil society. He then proposes that in the process of nation building, the whole of America should adopt a republican form of government.

In "Federalist #10," Madison expresses disagreement over Paine's notion of independence at its 'purest and natural sense.' Instead, he points out that in a pure democracy, there is potential for anarchy to occur, primarily because there are individuals whose "...factious tempers...local prejudices...sinister designs, may, by intrigue, by corruption, or by other means, first obtain the suffrages, and then betray the interests, of the people." Because of this natural tendency for the majority to be ruled by people who have vested interests, interests that do not concern the welfare of the nation, he proposes a republican government.