Review of the Book
Thomas Paine: Enlightenment, Revolution,
and the Birth of Modern Nations
by Craig Nelson
Edward J. Dodson
[A review of the book by published by Viking Penguin, 2006]
"Craig Nelson is the
author of four previous books, including The First Heroes
and Let's Get Lost. His writings have appeared in Salon,
the New England Review, Blender, Genre,
and a host of other publications. He was an editor at
HarperCollins, Hyperion, and Random House for almost twenty
years and has been profiled by Variety, Interview,
Manhattan, Inc., and Time Out. He lives in
Greenwich Village."
|
We are offered a new biography of Thomas Paine by Craig Nelson, a
writer who comes to the work from outside the academic community.
Nelson makes use of cultural anthropology to explore Paine's
development as one of the leading "moderns" of his age.
Nelson begins his story by examining Paine through the eyes of
William Cobbett, a man who first dismissed then embraced Paine's
political philosophy. Paine opened Cobbett's eyes, writes Nelson, to
the depth of corruption in the British system and to the connection
between Britain's imperial ambitions and an "escalating national
debt, crushing taxes, and overreliance on paper money." [p.4] A
decade after Paine's death, Cobbett tried but failed to relight the
torch of liberty Paine had carried from the New World to the Old. For
Cobbett, this was a true change of heart, as he had earlier attacked
Paine relentlessly. British authorities responded to this new
challenge, and Cobbett fled to the United States for the second time,
intent on resurrecting Paine's reputation and securing his place in
history.
What Cobbett discovered, observes Nelson, was that the new republic
had already lost much of its promise, that the "era of profound
hope was in eclipse." [p.4] Americans were heading in the wrong
direction, and Cobbett determined to remove the remains of his hero
from their New Rochelle, New York burial plot and return them to
England. For this, Cobbett experienced only scorn for his trouble.
And, of course, Paine's remains were lost as a result.
To understand how Thomas Pain became "Thomas Paine," Nelson
provides a rich description of the world in which Pain was born and
raised. He captures what living conditions were like for the
overwhelming majority of people in the British Isles, "95 percent
[of whom] were rural paupers trying to survive the enclosure movement,
when common folk were suddenly forbidden to graze their herds, hunt,
or forage on 3.4 million acres of now private grounds". [p.15]
This is what occurs when wealth and political institutions are tightly
in the grasp of a privileged elite. Nelson provides the details of
what passed for civilization in Britain.
The years of Paine's youth were great years for Britain's empire
builders. By defeating France in the Seven Years' War, Britain
cemented its control over the eastern territories of North America,
adding Canada to its dominions. Paine profited as well, returning from
a successful sojourn aboard the privateer King of Prussia.
With his share of the captured bounty, Paine visited London to nurture
his thirst for knowledge - purchasing "a pair of globes" and
taking in philosophical lectures at the Royal Society. Nelson
describes Paine's aspirations as "a rigorous course of
self-improvement leading to personal reinvention." [p.22] He had
come to London, where many things seemed possible, but also where
infant mortality, alcoholism, prostitution and crime plagued the lives
of most ordinary citizens. Even the least of crimes was punishable by
the penalty of death. He had just enough money, living humbly, to
spend time in the company of others who gathered to discuss science
and debate philosophy. I agree with Nelson's conclusion that "[i]t
is implausible that [Paine] took part in the Enlightenment in London
and the Revolution in Philadelphia
without having read the same
books that everyone else he knew had read." [p.33] He was drawn
by ideas into a culture where the study of the great thinkers was the
price of entry. As Nelson confirms, he "joined these Newtonians
with gusto, arguing with them in coffeehouses, reading the newest
scientific publications" and "[d]rinking, smoking, and
arguing
into all hours of the night." [p.36]
Unfortunately for Paine, his privateer earnings dwindled away,
forcing him back into the daily grind of trying to earn a living with
his hands, and then into the profession of excise tax collector. No
doubt Nelson is correct that Paine's experiences as an agent of the
state deepened his resolve to see his fellow Britons freed from
corrupt and oppressive government. More specifically, observes Nelson,
"Paine would repeatedly question the legitimacy of the British
dynasty by recalling its brutal origins in the Norman invasion."
[p.39] Over the years, others would emerge to join Paine in his
crusade against hereditary position. As is the case throughout
history, many paid a steep personal price for their courage. Paine's
first serious involvement in political activism, his pamphlet The
Case of the Officers of Excise, brought his dismissal from the
excise service. It was not that long before he found himself in
circumstances to "force him to risk all, to take a great leap of
faith that would lead to his immortality," [p.47] or his destiny
- in the wilds of North America.
This brings Paine's story to his fortuitous association with Benjamin
Franklin "a remarkably close friendship that would last for the
rest of Benjamin Franklin's life." [p.49] Just how much time they
spent together in London before Paine's departure is not known;
however, Franklin clearly developed a real affection for the younger
man. Arrived in North America, Paine wrote to Franklin: "Your
countenancing me has obtained me many friends and much reputation, for
which, please to accept my sincere thanks." What he did not say
is that Franklin's introductions had likely saved his life, as Paine
had become seriously ill on the voyage over.
Paine was overwhelmed by the contradictions between life in
Philadelphia and how most people existed back in Britain. The
Americans had blossomed under the long period of what historian
Charles Andrews called "salutary neglect" and the distant
connection to British authority. He had arrived in a land of property
owners. A seemingly endless supply of virgin land, combined with a low
population in the colonies meant "two-thirds were property owners
who voted, greatly broadening the political involvement of the working
and middle classes, and dramatically strengthening the power of the
legislature." [p.58] Yet, Paine soon learned that even here
wealth was already concentrated and entrenched privilege poised to
challenge the Jeffersonian vision of meritocracy. With so much free
land to be settled, slavery had been adopted to ensure a steady and
docile labor supply. All this Paine found repugnant and counter to
moral principle. "Is the barbarous enslaving our inoffensive
neighbours, and treating them like wild beasts subdued by force,
reconcilable with the divine precepts?" he asked in African
Slavery in America. "The nerve of this essay," writes
Nelson, "in time triggered a chain reaction, one eventually
leading to Paine's becoming Paine." [p.65] Clearly, Paine
believed that right thought should lead to right action.
By the time of Paine's migration to North America, the last
generation to experience Britain's benign rule over the colonies was
trying to negotiate a return to salutary neglect, using their only
effective weapon - a boycott of goods coming from Britain. Inevitably,
tensions mounted until the reconcilable became irreconcilable. The
great landlords of Britain ignored the warnings of the elder William
Pitt and Edmund Burke; arbitrary policy brought on resistance, then
rebellion. Yet, that rebellion did not begin out of a commitment to
forge a democratic republic. It was, as described in the early 1940s
by Peter Drucker, a campaign by the propertied interests to reclaim
the more or less laissez-faire rules under which they had
prospered. Only when the fighting began were the interests of the
remainder of the population (i.e., those who would do most of the
fighting) given consideration. Paine's declaration that what motivated
British aggression against their subjects was "the vilest of all
pretences, gold" applied similarly to the entrenched and
propertied colonial elite as well. Common Sense represented a
call to arms in defense of a cause few to that point articulated or
embraced. Nelson draws on Paine's own words to make this crucial
point:
"It cannot at this time a day be forgotten that the
politics, the opinions and the prejudices of the country were in
direct opposition to the principles contained in [Common Sense]. And
I well know that
it would have been unsafe for a man to have
espoused independence in any public company and after the appearance
of that pamphlet it was as dangerous to speak against it. It was a
point of time full of critical danger to America, and if her future
well being depended on any one political circumstance more than
another it was in changing the sentiments of the people from
dependence to Independence and form the monarchial to the republican
form of government; for had she unhappily split on the question, or
entered coldly or hesitatingly into it, she most probably had been
ruined." [pp.79-80]
As Nelson astutely observes, Paine's genius was his "ability to
address the colonists' greatest fears by appealing to their noblest
aspirations" while embracing the Lockean ideal of society as
formed by the voluntary association of sovereign individuals. Rather
than "the first American self-help book," as suggested by
Nelson, Common Sense was more of a primer on moral principles
and socio-political arrangements. Americans were, generally speaking,
too busy creating, accumulating (or confiscating) wealth to
contemplate these ideas, ideas Paine came to by his reading of the
great books and translated into straightforward language by his
debating experiences in the coffee houses of London. Paine articulated
for the Americans what they themselves could not, at least not in the
same inspired use of language. Nelson describes his incredible
accomplishment as "inspir[ing] colonials to see themselves
as pioneers and forefathers struggling to create a better world for
future generations."[85] Paine's challenge to the Americans was
clearly stated:
"Should an independency be brought about
we
have every opportunity and every encouragement before us, to form
the noblest, purest constitution on the face of the earth. We have
it in our power to begin the world over again." [p.89]
Paine understood what was at stake. He had come from the Old World
and life under a despotism justified by tradition and passed on as
enlightened governance. His actions later suggest he did not fully
appreciate the residual power of entrenched privilege and the need for
continuous public education to ensure that moral principles would
prevail over privilege as the nation at war faced the challenges of
societal organization. As Jefferson predicted, factions were fast
appearing as the fighting against the British came to a close. Had
Paine remained on the American side of the Atlantic, had he continued
to rally the general citizenry to common principles, his own future
would have certainly been quite different - as, possibly, would the
first decades of nation-building by the United States of America.
Sadly, the clock cannot be turned back and restarted.
Of Nelson's description of the war years and of Paine's activities
during this period, I have only a few comments. Readers already
well-versed in Paine's life story will find little new here, which
leaves us to contemplate Nelson's interpretation of events and the
motivations of those involved. Even discounting the avowed Loyalists,
there is considerable evidence that only a minority (although a
sizeable minority) of the colonists "were hoping to create a
meritocratic instead of an aristocratic society
based on
Enlightenment principles of liberty and the educated citizen."
[p.117] Some decades ago, the historian Jackson Turner Main concluded
that as early as the mid-eighteenth century the primary means of
acquiring great wealth in the colonies was inheritance, and the means
of doing so came from the concentrated ownership of land. Paine joined
with the Physiocratic school of political economists in calling for
landowners to pay a "ground rent" to the community for the
privilege they enjoyed. Agrarian Justice puts Paine squarely in the
group of moral philosophers who declared the earth to be the
birthright of all persons, equally. How Paine came to embrace these
principles as his own is not well-documented, and Paine does not
disclose the development of his thinking on the subject.
If I have any serious disagreement with Nelson, this disagreement is
with his observation that the "colonial era was a time when
American Indians and Europeans became fully integrated as a community,
with full and common relationships not only of business and of
government but of friendship and intermarriage." [p.117] More
accurately, I argue, the indigenous tribes were unable to restrain the
European immigrants and their descendants from an almost continuous
migration from coastal settlements into the interior. Some integration
occurred, but the population of most tribes suffered rapid decline as
a consequence of frequent warfare between tribes (made more vicious by
the introduction of European weaponry) and as allies with the French
or English colonial regimes - and by contracting European diseases
against which they had no resistance. Nelson mentions the
sophistication of the Iroquois confederation but does not tell his
readers that on instructions from George Washington, a large army of
Continental troops was sent into the Iroquois territory with
instructions to destroy every village and all food crops they found,
clearing the land permanently of these troublesome people, many of
whom subsequently starved during that winter. This would be only the
first of the major campaigns to displace the continent's tribal
societies from the land they occupied to make way for the new American
System, the cornerstones of which were land grabs, land
speculations and landed wealth.
Paine's writings during the war continually reminded the "Inhabitants
of America" they were fighting for more than mere independence
from British authority. The ideal of self-government, born over
several generations of experience in the New World, was at risk of
being subdued before blossoming. And, in an era of great ironies, one
of the greatest was that a monarchial regime even more despotic than
that ruling Britain came to the rescue of republicanism. France's
minister of finance, the Physiocratic leader Anne-Robert-Jacques
Turgot, warned his sovereign that French support of the American cause
would bankrupt the nation's treasury (notwithstanding the fact that
the landed aristocracy continued to enrich itself with ground rents
but paid no taxes). When Turgot campaigned with the King to impose
taxes on the landed, they orchestrated his dismissal. The French were
from that point on a straight path toward social and political
turmoil, although few, if any, sensed what the outcome might be.
That Paine did not recognize the dangers attached to an American
alliance with the French - and argue against this entanglement - is
another of the great ironies of his thinking. Through Franklin, Paine
is certainly to have learned of Turgot's opposition to French
assistance. At that critical point, he decided to accompany John
Laurens to France and provide whatever support he could to Benjamin
Franklin. The French progressives welcomed him as a man of letters and
gave him pause about ever returning to North America, "to a
country where I had experienced so much thankless treatment," he
wrote. Viewed in the full context of his earlier life, Paine's
feelings are hard to reconcile with the acceptance he experienced
among the colonials. Nelson allows Paine's expression of frustration
to pass by without comment, for the moment, writing later that "Paine
wanted both acknowledgment of his place in history and long-term
financial security." [p.158] His patriotism during the war
prevented him from profiting from his writings; but, with peace he
fully expected to be recognized, honored and pensioned. What was in
his heart came out in his final Crisis paper, written in April, 1783:
"'The times that tried men's souls,' are over - and
the greatest and completest revolution the world ever knew,
gloriously and happily accomplished.
It is not every country
(perhaps there is not another in the world) that can boast so fair
an origin.
"
But, for Paine, his own soul would be more than tried over the course
of the remainder of his years. There would be little time for calm
reflection. In this chaotic period, he alerted his readers to his
likely departure from the New World, writing: "and whatever
country I may hereafter be in, I shall always feel an honest pride at
the part I have taken and acted, and a gratitude to nature and
providence for putting it in my power to be of some use to mankind."
From Nelson we read of Paine's subsequent missteps and lapses in
judgment that compromised a graceful passage into old age, years that
might have been filled with scientific experiments and moderate public
service. Nelson identifies another important piece of the puzzle
directing Paine's life away from America:
"The Common Sense/Declaration of Independence
era, with its glorious aspirational hopes and dizzying optimism, was
over, replaced by the retrenchment period of war's end. Now was a
time for the practical toil of creating a national government,
instead of dreaming Enlightenment dreams. There had been a great era
of utopians, but now the American Congress was by necessity a body
of compromise, of down-and-dirty politics and expedient business
negotiations." [pp.171-172]
These were matters about which Paine had no practical knowledge or
experience. Yet, Franklin, returning to Philadelphia and learning of
Paine's absence, wrote, "I cannot help regretting the want of
your abilities here where the present moment they might, I think, be
successfully employed. Parties still run very high - Common Sense
would unite them. It is to be hoped therefore it has not abandoned us
forever." [p.172] I have long wondered why Paine, the journalist,
did not return to his fundamental calling as a newspaper editor. Paine
may have contemplated the future of a celebrated sage, but he
apparently looked to commerce - and the building of bridges - to
provide for his financial security. His bridge took him back across
the Atlantic (at the urging of Franklin, and with new letters of
introduction from Franklin to key members of the French scientific
community). This time, however, he saw the Old World rather
differently, writing in a letter, "the noblest work of human
wisdom, the grandest scene of human glory, the fair cause of freedom
rose and fell
send me safe back to my much loved America!"?
[p.178]
Paine had come back to a surreal world, and Nelson describes the
unfolding drama. Turgot's warning of financial ruin was upon the
French, and the thin veneer of social stability was by 1787 wearing
then. Wealth in France was concentrated in the hands of the landed
aristocracy, who collected ground rents from those who actually worked
the land. Even so, the trigger events sparking revolutionary upheaval
came from nature - "a series of harsh winters, destructive
hailstorms, and runs of drought, triggering famine and doubling the
prices of bread and firewood." [p.182] The stars were aligning
for the coming turmoil - riots, assassinations, conspiracies, warfare,
and - finally - dictatorship. Paine would live through it all, if just
barely. Many of the best minds of France did not survive.
Physiocratie, the ideas that might have ushered in a true "Age of
Reason," were denigrated and forgotten.
An important part of Paine's story remains to be told, I believe, and
may await a biographer who examines the personal papers of the great
Physiocratic theorists with whom Paine came to know. Turgot, I have
already mentioned. There was also Quesnay, physician to the King, and
Pierre-Samuel du Pont de Nemeurs (who would eventually escape to the
United States). Franklin knew these men and embraced their principles.
Paine's writings on political economy indicates he did as well.
Franklin's death in 1790 had to have affected Paine deeply; they had
shared so much; they had been present at the creation and had given
all they had to give to influence the outcome. In a very real sense,
with Franklin gone, Paine was now alone. His accomplishments from this
point on must be considered remarkable, yet his judgment failed him
more frequently as the years passed. Perhaps the wise counsel of
Franklin might have tempered his actions, if not his thoughts.
Because of the French Revolution and the response of Edmund Burke to
what was occurring in France, we have Paine's most coherent treatise
on political philosophy, The Rights of Man. On the one hand,
as Nelson writes, "[i]t is the exaltation of the great mass of
humankind that makes Rights of Man thrilling and distinctive,
so much so that in the decades after its publication the very phrase
'rights of man' would come to mean not just civil and natural rights,
but a reengineering of government to provide for the greater good, a
state designed for the happiness of the largest number of citizens
instead of its elite ruling class." But, then, Paine would allow
himself to be persuaded that monarchy and feudalism could be toppled
and the void filled by a democratic republic. The Americans had been
extraordinarily fortunate in their long experience of self-sufficiency
and local governance. Neither the French nor his fellow Britons
enjoyed anything approaching this same history. And, then, for a time,
Paine put his faith in Napoleon Bonaparte to defend the French
Constitution and save the republic. His failure to understand the
enormous stresses George Washington was experiencing in the Office of
President of the United States, and then going public with an attack
on Washington, demonstrates his loss of perspective - more so, I
think, than publication of The Age of Reason. Paine was, after
all, only one actor on a very troubled world stage.
Jefferson had a clear insight into the future even as the Americans'
war for independence from Britain was just beginning. He anticipated
that as soon as peace came so would the Patriots begin to form
themselves into opposing parties. Paine's return to the United States
came too late - too late in his own life and too late for his presence
to have a unifying influence. "As Ben Franklin had predicted,"
writes Nelson, "America at that moment crucially needed the
renewal of values and the inspiration to virtue that had always been a
Paine hallmark. If Paine himself was no longer capable of writing a
Common Sense, American Crisis, or Rights of Man
for the United States of 1800, he tried, with a series of ten articles
on modern American politics." [p.308] The extent to which these
articles influenced public opinion is not addressed by Nelson, but
neither other biographers nor historians, generally, suggest that
Paine's return and his subsequent writings contributed materially to
the ascendance of Jefferson or the Jeffersonian-Republicans.
There is nothing in this biography to distinguish the
telling of Paine's final few years. The facts are as they are. It
seems appropriate to repeat Paine's remarks as he neared death: "I
care not a straw for the opinions of the world." [p.322]
Benjamin Franklin, ignored at the end of his own life, would
eventually be lifted by historians to his rightful place in the public
memory. Paine's resurrection has taken considerably longer, but this
book by Craig Nelson is one more bit of evidence that Paine is
deserving of our lasting gratitude and respect. Above almost all his
contemporaries, he possessed a moral sense of right and wrong - of
justice versus injustice -- deserving of serious study and debate
today.
|