Thomas Paine is an important writer at an important time that bequeaths us in his ‘Rights of Man’ a fundamental shakeup of what our democratic rights as citizens should be, drawing especially on the French Revolution and also American Revolution and the fundamental rights that their new revolutionary societies produced for their citizens. Paine delivers during the Enlightenment a wake up call to those in countries that are yet to adapt to revolutions, where traditional Royal power and political representation in not so clear democratic institutions abide. Jean-Jacques Rousseau in his ‘Social Contract’ fanned the flames of the French Revolution of 1789 and his words rang in the ears of revolutionaries right down the the last blood spilt buy the Guillotine. It was a period of political pamphleteering and Paine was no stranger to this. He was in essence the Rousseau of the English-speaking world. The thinking behind his work and through other similar political philosophers of the Enlightenment was that the American and French revolutions were no anomalies and that they were just the precursor of more to come and that like dominoes, the Monarchies of Europe were destined to topple and follow suit, paving the way for more liberty and Bills of Rights and written constitutions that would empower the masses across the globe in the dawn of a new age. It is indeed quite bizarre that the predictions of Paine et al never actually materialised. Indeed one of his main target audiences, here in the U.K., has remained almost identical politically to the present with a dual chamber of elected representatives and hereditary peers behind an historical monarch as head of state. Paine explores the rights for citizens as laid out by the French and also details the new American constitution and what it means to the general citizen. The points he makes and the evidence truly is eye-opening and remarkable and it does seem appealing. He directly contrasts the new legal rights in these revolutionary societies with the lack of actual rights we have in places like Britain. Paine elucidates a very powerful argument against hereditary political empowerment, reaching up to the King or Queen themselves. He often attacks his rival Edmund Burke who in his own literary offerings, is critical of both revolutions and defends the merits of the British system. Indeed his obsession with Mr Burke somewhat detracts from some of the points about the Rights of Man that Paine is attempting to transmit. When weighed up it isn’t as crystal clear as an obviously biased Pain might suggest and indeed he, is his complete acceptance and as
a disciple of the new systems, almost suffered some of the more bloodies and brutal aspects of the new revolutionary societies as he only escaped being guillotined in Paris by the skin of his teeth during the height of The Terror. I am surprised that Paine managed to write this in the first place at such a tumultuous period of history. Indeed in his native Britain his work must have been viewed by the authorities with treasonous contempt. It is a controversial and powerful book to readers today and I can see why it is celebrated as a cornerstone work for human rights and politics. I dread to think just how controversial and revolutionary it must have been to the many readers of the ‘Rights of Man’ during the period from whence it sprung.