Even as the Congress was meeting, the fighting continued. Key battles included the Battle of Bunker hill in Boston on June 17, 1775, which was a defeat for the colonial militia but gave the colonists confidence that they could fight the better-trained and better-equipped British army. At the Battle of Dorchester Heights, the Continental Army under George Washington recaptured Boston.

The event of 1775 pushed more colonists to support independence. One such colonist was Thomas Paine. Paine issued an influential pamphlet called Common Sense in which he called for a declaration of independence. His argument, based on Enlightenment thinking, said that under the theory of the social contract, the British government had failed to protect the rights and liberties of its citizens in North America.

In 1776 a committee of the Continental Congress began to draft the Declaration of Independence. The Declaration formally announced the colonies’ break with Britain and expressed three main ideas. First, it stated that men possessed certain “inalienable rights” including “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” Next, the Declaration said that King George had passed unfair laws and taxed the colonies unfairly. Finally, it declared that the colonies had the right to break away from Great Britain because King George had violated the conditions of the social contract  when Britain passed these unfair laws.

They declared that they would no longer be forced to bow down to the government that allowed them no voice. They would no longer surrender to this government their lands, their homes, their security, their freedom. Their declaration was simple, “Give me liberty or give me death!” They banded together and wrote the words:

“And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.”

In that age, their declaration was for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness with a government that would protect and serve the governed. Many men gave their lives for this cause. A cause best explained in Declaration of Independence, which if you have not read then Google it and read it! To me the most important part of this document was not only true then but is true again today. The following is an excerpt from the Declaration of Independence.

“That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”                  

When the war was over and the leaders of the states met to write our Constitution, they spoke for, argued for and comprised for the best form of government to represent the people of their states. At the end of the day on June 21, 1788, our country had the government that we deserved.

With upcoming anniversary of the birth of our great nation, I look around and wonder if those that we are governed by are worth fighting for or do we need to take up arms against them? What is the purpose of the Fourth of July? On July 4, 1776, it was a day to tell the British that we would no longer live under their monarchial rule.

Our elected officials are more concerned with sticking to party lines or trying to cover-up wiener shots on Twitter than maintain loyalty to their constituents or the Constitution. The fight however is not over. Call your congressman or congresswoman (must stay politically correct here), not just the one from your district but the ones from your state and your neighboring state. Call your mayor. Call your governor. Make your voice be heard. We do not yet need weapons to defend our liberties; diplomacy is our weapon. Our voice will always be heard at one place and that is the ballot box. That is what is meant by “alter the government”, to remove those that are doing us harm with their greed and their selfish quest for power and glory.

If you do not believe you need to make any calls then I ask you to again to go and read or re-read the Declaration of Independence. Read it slowly. Read the list of grievances and apply them to our government today. Our founding fathers would be ashamed of what we are letting our governments (state, local and federal) do to us.

Then ask yourself, would men and women like John Boehner, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Barney Frank, Rahm Emmanuel, Emmanuel Cleaver or Barack Obama been in the shoes of our founding fathers, ever stood up to the overwhelming power of the British Empire to bring freedom to our land? If your answer is no, they why do you let them lead you now? If your answer is yes, then you truly deserve the government you get at the end of the day.

Goethe, the German thinker and writer write that talent develops in quiet places and there is a personal observation that this writer has noticed when he wakes up from sleep or is allowed some solitude, some fresh ideas come forward that would otherwise not occur with the hustle and bustle of daily routines.

Thomas Paine who influenced the coming of American revolution through his writing was quoted to have referred to character as more easily kept then returned to. Thinking about how one changes in life and whose character changes, it is difficult to go back into a former mold than it is to keep on with older habits. One may think of the life of the student and how it is so difficult for many to return to a student lifestyle after having lived through it as opposed to staying on a constant student and never giving up the will to study.

Plutarch the Greek historian and writer made a statement  about how character is injured habit. This is close to home as this writer thinks about moments that take him outside of his normal working routine and then  asks of himself to go through certain loops that are not necessarily easy because they not done regularly. Probably a persons character can be seen as he copes with the unexpected event or an abrupt change in life which is all the more welcome so that we do not just become creatures of total habit and void of change.

Thomas Paine wrote “The American Crisis” in the midst of the Revolutionary War. His goal was to instill a spirit of patriotism within the American populace and also to comment on the course of the war so far. His message was that although the Americans had done well so far, now was not the time to stop, and that with continued hard work they would soon be victorious. The paper acted just as he meant it to, raising moral within the armed forces and also insinuating a nationalist spirit in many citizens which caused them to focus much more of their time and energy into the war effort. Not only did it affect his expected audience, it also converted many Americans who support the British into revolutionary people who joined in the effort for liberation. Because of his message, the American population came together under the banner of hard work and put everything towards their independence. With this common goal, the Americans emerged the victors, and gained independence from Britain, largely due to the hard work of the American people.

Many years later, hard work is still a value present in the American spirit, and it is personified best by Thomas Alva Edison. Although he was behind many different inventions that are now common in everyday life, he is perhaps most famous for the light bulb. After countless experiments with various filaments that did not function as he desired, any normal person may have given up. But Edison realized the value of dedication, and continued his search for the perfect material. When asked about his apparent failure, he famously replied “I have not failed, I have just found 10,000 ways that will not work,” and pressed on. His hard work and dedication eventually payed off when he found the carbon based material that pleased him. This hard work not only led to his famous status as the creator of the light bulb, but also bestowed upon him the title of one of the most prolific inventors in history.

Hard work has also been one of the shaping forces in my own life. As I have matured throughout my life, I have come to the realization that dedication to schoolwork and also to the things I enjoy is what will truly bring me happiness in life. Because of this, I have decided to take school seriously, and to challenge myself with difficult classes that require my full attention and effort. It has also translated into my athletic career, as I have decided to take my participation in lacrosse above and beyond what is necessary in order to make myself a better player and also to improve my utility for the team. Finally, it has carried into my love for teaching and snowboarding, where I have become a certified instructor after several years of hard work on and off the mountain. Each of these has opened doors for me, such as being able to choose from a much larger pool of colleges due to my success in school, and also new career options due to my dedication to snow sport instruction. Hard work has clearly transformed my life, and in no way has a significant negative effect been created by this effort. It has done nothing but move me forward in life, and has only contributed to my own American Dream.

Although being an American has several meanings and is associated with several values, hard work is the most vital of these values. It fueled the creation of the United States, was the driving force behind Thomas Edison’s creativity and perseverance, and also continues to forge my own path through life.

            “How To Make a Great Empire Into a Small One” by Franklin was published in 1773, three years before the signing of the Declaration of Independence.  Within it, many of the essential stances that would later surface in Jefferson’s declaration were put into form and made available to the public.  In the sixth paragraph of the text Franklin writes,

“However peaceably your Colonies have submitted to your Government, shewn their Affection to your Interest, and patiently borne their Grievances, you are to suppose them always inclined to revolt, and treat them accordingly. Quarter troops among them, who by their Insolence may provoke the rising of Mobs.”

Here, Franklin clearly warns the British in a broad matter, directly stating that if the current treatment of the colonies was held in place, it would not be long until the misfortunate citizens would revolt.  Franklin knew that the colonists had grown tired of the government and that they had also begun to deeply despise their ruling authorities.  Three years later, Thomas Jefferson would change the feeling and tone of Franklin’s words, which basically were used as propaganda to make the people question the King’s rule.  In a more lawful, “professional” manner, in the Declaration of Independence Jefferson echoed the ideas first conjured up by Franklin in his famous quote,

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.— That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government.”

Like Franklin did before him, Jefferson reiterates that the British Empire’s actions would lead to a revolution by the colonists.  This is one of the many examples of Jefferson mirroring the work written before his own, but they do not apply solely to Franklin’s work.

            Thomas Paine’s “Common Sense”, published just months before Jefferson drafted the declaration, added more fuel to the fire found within the angered colonists, the same fire that Franklin helped to ignite a few years earlier.  With a sense of anger-filled aggression, Thomas Paine reached for the emotions of the colonists through his words, “

“This new world hath been the asylum for the persecuted lovers off civil and religious liberty from every Part of Europe. Hither have they fled, not from the tender embraces of the mother, but from the cruelty of the monster; and it is so far true of England, that the same tyranny which drove the first emigrants from home pursues their descendants still.”

Over the time in between “How To Make a Great Empire Into a Small One” and “Common Sense” were published, the prevalence of the tense atmosphere that hinted at the coming rebellion had risen significantly.  The defined line of influence that went from one author to the next can be seen chronologically. First, there was Franklin’s warning of a coming revolt, then came “Common Sense” which further pushed the need to be free of the British, and finally Jefferson’s Declaration of Independence fulfilled the wishes of the colonists by writing a document that withheld the same ideas of the previous two men’s work.  

             A tightly held bond was present among the men who participated in the American Revolution, formed by a commonly shared set of focused, unmistakably defined ideals.  This was a key factor in uniting the American people to resist the British.  The historical document penned by Jefferson made the ultimate dream of the revolutionaries into reality- he wrote a piece that was eloquent and powerful enough to bring a group of fifty-six men together under one cause.  Whether direct or indirect, Paine and Franklin’s work held a central role in the ratification of the Declaration of Independence to ensure that the majority of the population’s demands were met.  Benjamin Franklin even made some slight edits with the help of John Adams.  Overall, the messages found in “Common Sense” and “How To Make a Great Empire Into a Small One” had such undeniable influence on Jefferson’s Declaration that one cannot deny they helped to pave the path that lead to the successful agreement upon the most important piece of writing in American history.

Philadelphia Convention

The Constitutional convention in Philadelphia consisted of 55 delegates who were appointed by their individual state legislatures. While Jefferson referred to the caliber of the delegates as “demigods” many of the influential persons of the Revolution (Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, Thomas Paine, Sam Adams, John Hancock) were either not elected to the convention, or were not present at the convention. Washington was elected to preside over the convention. The purpose of the convention was to create an entirely new “Law of the Land”, under the Congressional pretense of “revising the Articles of Confederation”. All of the delegates agreed that the Articles were woefully inadequate and were all interested in strengthening the union. Many things led to the Convention, the idea that the Articles were inadequate (in that they did not regulate trade correctly), the desire to protect the newly established Union from foreign attackers (The Dey of Algiers) and a desire to unify the country. The convention was held in complete secrecy, and Congress believed that the convention was only aiming to revise the Articles, not create an entirely new set of laws.

Common Sense by Thomas Paine and The Declaration of Independence by Thomas Jefferson have several common themes. Both documents are related to Enlightened thinking, which is characterized by reason being used over tradition to make decisions, as well as freedom of thought, as opposed to following tradition, which was following the British for the colonists in America. The documents also focused on the idea of rights, which was an essential part of enlightened thinking. They are both related to Enlightened thinking, especially the ideas of John Locke, which are present in both primary source documents. The idea of life and liberty, which were part of Locke’s philosophy and the enlightened thinking are present throughout both documents. As well, these two documents relate to mercantilism, since one of the main reasons for opposing the English Constitution was because of strict policies and regulation which were part of mercantilism. They also relate to mercantilism in referring to exports and restrictions placed on them by the British, in Navigation Acts. Also, King George III, who was seen as a despot, relates to the theme of absolutism, and power being in the hands of one supreme person. In opposing mercantilism, in both documents, the philosophy of economics is touched upon. Specifically, the philosophies of Adam Smith on the economy, such as that of supply and demand governing the marketplace as opposed to a ruler, or government, are presented as a solution, or replacement of mercantilism. Adam Smith’s philosophy on the role of the government, which is that government is needed to be in charge of administration, the protection of rights and justice are presented in the documents as a way of pushing and promoting liberty in general. Both primary source documents are related to the themes of enlightenment, mercantilism, despotism, and economics.

The pamphlet begins with comments about government.  He believes that people have a tendency to confuse government with society.  He states, “Society is produced by our wants, and government by our wickedness; the former promotes our happiness positively by uniting or affections, the latter negatively by restraining our vices.”   He believed society was good but government was a necessary evil due to man’s vices.  He felt government’s fundamental purpose was to provide security and the successful government was able to fulfill this role by restraining the evil in man.  Society on the other hand was a force to promote “our happiness positively”. 

Beginnings of Society

Paine used an example of a small number of people placed in a small region of land, cut off from all humanity.  Unable to live alone, they found themselves working together in order to avoid solitude.  Together they would build shelters, feed, and clothe themselves.  They were creating a society.  As long as they treated each other with respect they would need no law.  However, in order to account for defects in human nature, law and order would have to be initiated. 

Concept of a Government

As society grew, so did government have to grow and representation had to begin.  Paine believed that “the more simple any thing is, the less likely it is to be disordered.”  He attacks the British constitution because of its “complexity”.   He also doesn’t believe that the British government has a system of checks and balances.

The Government today

Today our government appears to be trying to promote “our happiness positively”.   I wonder what Thomas Paine would have thought about our government today?  It is doubtful he would like the way government interferes with society.   I think he would wonder if government had an ulterior motive for trying to be involved in our happiness.

Thomas Paine was against the complexity of Government.  The complexity of passing a bill in the government today usually has a lot of “pork” in it and needing a lawyer to be able to read it, would have been objectionable, based on what Thomas Paine thought of government. 

Our government doesn’t appear to be listening to the people only to themselves and filling their pockets with our money.  Government appears no longer to be “by the people, of the people, and for the people, but it stead it wants to “sock it to the people”.

Unfortunately this hasn’t occurred over night.  This has been coming on for years. 

We have allowed our representatives free hand in doing what ever they want.  Our government seems out of touch and out of step with the people.  The lack of representation in our congress and senate shows how far we have gone away from the founding fathers.  Thomas Paine would probably frown on the complexity of our government today.  He would have considered our government to day to be evil. 

And the electoral college would probably not be a system Thomas Paine would have endorsed.  He would have pushed for the popular voting system.

Thomas Paine would be irate at the way government is spending the taxpayer’s money as if “Debt Isn’t Bad”.

I don’t know if we can wait until the next election to sound the trumpet of alarm.  But we need to shake up or representatives and senators and get them to pay attention to what they are doing and to needs and desires of the people. 

Although he was born and raised in England and did not venture to America until his late thirties, when the revolution was well underway, Thomas Paine had a knack for rebellion. When he was merely eight years old, after hearing a sermon delivered by his father, Paine denounced Christianity and the church, marking him as a natural rebel. His feelings towards religion can be seen throughout Common Sense, mainly when he is trying to find a reason for all the pain and suffering Americans have had to endure. He sarcastically points out “The Reformation was preceded by the discovery of America: as if the Almighty graciously meant to open a sanctuary to the persecuted in future years, when home should afford neither friendship nor safety,” (330). Not only does Paine reveal his doubtful outlook on Christianity, he tries to find a logical explanation for the fighting. Although, knowing Paine’s background, it easy to see that his logical methods are used patronizingly.

Although Paine sharply discusses his religious beliefs, or lack thereof, he makes an important attempt to accurately address his main audience, the common man. Although Paine is clearly of higher intelligence than most Americans of his time, he makes a point to speak directly to them. This pamphlet was not written to Thomas Paine’s contemporaries or scholars, it was addressed to the men and women who were involved in the revolution. After all, they were the people he wanted to persuade. When discussing the benefits of splitting from Great Britain, Paine makes a point to emphasize the impact it would have on American industry, “Our plan is commerce, and that, well attended to, will secure us the peace and friendship of all Europe; because it is the interest of all Europe to have America a free port. Her trade will always be a protection, and her barrenness of gold and silver secure her from invaders,” (329). Here Paine addresses the common man by discussing a specific topic that is relevant to all those fighting. He understands that if he desires to make any impact in advancing the revolution, he must speak to the heart of America: the common man. Through Paine’s logical thinking, he is able make headway with his pamphlet by finding the right angle on the right audience.

Finally, it is important to note another logical approach that Thomas Paine uses to articulate his point. While the majority of his pamphlet discusses the wrongs done to America by England, there is a brief section where he calls on his countryman to reflect upon themselves in order to see the wrongs done by the mother country. He asks bold questions of his fellow patriot, “…hath your house been burnt? Hath your property been destroyed before your face? Are your wife and children destitute of a bed to lie on, or bread to live on? Have you lost a parent or a child by their hands, and yourself the ruined and wretched survivor?” (331). Paine asks these harsh questions in order to fuel any lingering resentment that Americans may feel towards the British, in the hopes of sparking a full-out rebellion. Furthermore, after these questions are asked, Paine points out, “If you have not, then you are not a judge of those who have. But if you have, and can still shake hands with the murderers, then are you unworthy the name of husband, father, friend, or lover, and whatever may be your rank or title in life, you have the heart of a coward, and the spirit of a sycophant,” (331). With these defining words, Thomas Paine strikes fear into those Americans who do not support the revolution. Paine resorts to name calling when he refers to the British as “murderers” and all their supporters as “cowards” and “sycophants.” This attempt is logical in the sense that Paine asks his audience to step back and look at themselves. It is this self-reflecting approach that he uses in order to further capture his audience. Likewise, Paine understands that none of his readers hope to be called a coward or sycophant, and will most likely do anything to change that image of themselves.

Through various logical appeals, Thomas Paine calls upon his country to continue to take up arms and cut all ties with England once and for all. He uses his rebellious nature, his understanding of the American people, and moral reasoning in order to get through to his countrymen. Although Common Sense was a small pamphlet, the impact it had on the war was magnanimous. Through Paine’s logic, he is able to turn this political propaganda into one of the most influential pieces of American prose.

Works Cited

Baym, Nina. The Norton Anthology of American Literature. 7th ed. Vol. 1. New York:    W. W. Norton and Company, 2008. 326-332.

Thomas Paine is one writer who used the pen to influence change. He proved the pen is mightier than the sword. His writings have united the spirit of the nation. These include Common Sense, The Crisis, The Rights of Man, The Age of Reason, and Other Pamphlets, Articles, and Letters.

Crevecoeur and Thomas Paine’s writings bore some striking resemblance. For instance, both authors are very outspoken in their point of views. They both love to get into the heart of the matter as exemplified in their essays in Thomas Paine “Common Sense” and Crevecoeur “Letters from an American Farmer”. And they both can write complex ideas and present them into simple, vivid and clear form.

Nationalism or love of country is greatly steeped in their bones and is apparent in the topics they write. Thomas Paine in Common Sense said “The cause of America is in a great measure the cause of all mankind. Many circumstances hath, and will arise, which

are not local, but universal, and through which the principles of all Lovers of Mankind are affected, and in the Event of which, their Affections are interested.”

While both authors shared a common love of country, their views and their approach in writing differs. Crevecoeur espoused the American Dream and all that is good in America. Paine, on the other hand, held liberal, even to the point of being radical, views on governance. He was vocal and fearless on his views against monarchy, government and slavery.

Paine’s outspoken nature is obvious in his work In The Age of Reason. He writes: ‘The religion that approaches the nearest of all others to true deism, in the moral and benign part thereof, is that professed by the Quakers … though I revere their philanthropy, I cannot help smiling at [their] conceit; … if the taste of a Quaker [had] been consulted at the Creation, what a silent and drab-colored Creation it would have been! Not a flower would have blossomed its gaieties, nor a bird been permitted to sing,’

Their contrasting view on the “New Adam” is what makes it more interesting. While, Crevecoeur espoused the idea of contentment and pursuit of American dream, Paine demanded to see more changes and was very dissatisfied with the way things went during his time. And these contrasting views are as applicable today, the way they found acceptance centuries ago.