Common Sense vs. Declaration of Independence: Key Differences

Introduction: Revolution in the Minds of the People

People often confuse the American Revolution with the War for Independence. Although they share similar motives and actions, they are not one and the same. As John Adams noted in a letter to Thomas Jefferson in 1815, "What do we mean by the Revolution? The war? That was no part of the Revolution" (Bailyn, 1967, p. 1).

Adams goes on to explain that the war was more a consequence and effect than a component of the Revolution as it developed. The Revolution existed in the minds of people long before anyone heard the first gunshot. "The records of thirteen legislatures, the pamphlets, newspapers in all the colonies, ought to be consulted during that period to ascertain the steps by which the public opinion was enlightened and informed concerning the authority of Parliament over the colonies." This lesson examines the "Revolution in the minds of the people" (Bailyn, 1967, p. 1). In writing this, Adams focuses on describing Thomas Paine's extraordinarily influential pamphlet Common Sense, published in January 1776 and reprinted twenty-five times in the following year, helping to inspire the Declaration of Independence.

The American Revolution inspired the War for Independence. Common Sense inspired the Declaration of Independence. This essay focuses on explaining the differences and similarities of both works. Although Common Sense fueled the decision to write the Declaration of Independence, the Declaration of Independence was — and still is — an effective piece of writing that cemented the independence of a nation. Inspiration plays a pivotal role in generating the seeds of change; however, it is the act of establishment that produces long-term effects.

Thomas Paine and Common Sense

Thomas Paine (1737–1809) wrote numerous books and pamphlets that many consider to have greatly contributed to delegitimizing the claims to power of the British state. Paine proclaimed that "society in every state is a blessing, but government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one" (Sargent, 1997, p. 60). He engaged the reader by directing attention to the dialogue surrounding the nature of monarchs in the Bible. Because the Bible was so widely known, readers could easily associate and connect with Paine's words and ideas.

Regarding the specific assertions of the British Empire, Paine stated: "No man in his senses can say that their claim under William the Conqueror is a very honorable one. A French bastard, landing with an armed banditti and establishing himself king of England against the consent of the natives…" (Wilensky, Richardson, & Paine, 2008, p. 168). In essence, Paine argued that no one could easily convince native inhabitants to submit to a ruler — especially one who was nothing like them.

This argument fueled the writing of the Declaration of Independence, though by no means did Common Sense prove as consequential in a formal sense. The Declaration of Independence existed as far more than a simple declaration of intent to sever political relations with Britain. Like Common Sense, it is a carefully constructed argument justifying that aim, and both are ranked among the most significant political documents in history.

The Declaration of Independence and Its Stakes

The Founders presented a careful set of opinions and arguments for revolution — a course not undertaken lightly, with full awareness of the potential penalties. When the signatories concluded the document with "We mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor" (Haran, 2010, p. 224), each signatory recognized that he was perhaps signing his own death warrant in the event of failure.

This marks a clear difference between Common Sense and the Declaration of Independence. There were no equivalent personal stakes or sacrifice for Thomas Paine. Thomas Jefferson and those who signed the Declaration of Independence, however, faced mortal consequences. Had America lost the War of Independence, those who had launched the true Revolution would likely have been executed. People like Thomas Paine might have escaped the wrath of the British Empire, but Thomas Jefferson could not have. Inspiration, in other words, is not the same as execution.

Conclusion: Legacy of Liberty

The most enduring legacy of the American Revolution is the endeavor to establish a system of distinct liberty and restricted government overseen by law — a system compatible with the nature of people as ethical agents possessing absolute rights. That effort has served as an inspiration to lovers of freedom across the world, and the documents that gave it voice continue to shape political thought centuries later.

References

Bailyn, B. (1967). The ideological origins of the American Revolution. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

Haran, T. (2010). Our lives, our fortunes, our sacred honor. [United States]: Xlibris Corporation.

Sargent, L. (1997). Political thought in the United States. New York: New York University Press.

Wilensky, M., Richardson, T., & Paine, T. (2008). The elementary Common sense of Thomas Paine. New York: Savas Beaties.