However, Paine’s valedictions changed over the course of the late 1780s. In a letter to Kitty Nicholson Few, he simply signed off with “Thomas Paine”—but only after writing “God bless you all! and send me safe back to my much loved America!” A letter to Jefferson closed with “I remain yours affectionately.” In 1790, Paine continued to sign his letters to friends with variations on “I am my dear friend yours very affectionately.” For more formal occasions, or addressing those in more elevated positions whom he respected, he would still use some variant of “your humble servant” such as in a letter to George Washington of October 26, 1789, where he signed it “your most affectiona. obedient Hblservant.”

For those to whom he bore some resentment or hostility, he omitted any valediction, adding only his signature. We see this in a letter to John King (1793), Gouverneur Morris(1794), and Daniel Isaacs Eaton (1795). But Paine’s most famously assertive valediction can be seen in his letter to Home Secretary Henry Dundas (of Britain), reproaching the latter for issuing a proclamation that sought to suppress “seditious” writings. Here, Paine signs his letter with great aplomb, writing “Not your obedient humble Servant, But the contrary, THOMAS PAINE.” A far cry indeed from his earlier valedictions!

Later in life, a new signature appeared: “Yours in friendship.” Less courtly, but so much more heartfelt!

The post From Humble Servant to Friend appeared first on .

When we hear the name Theodore Dreiser, we think of his novels, Sister Carrie (1900) or An American Tragedy (1925), adapted into George Stevens’ film, A Place in the Sun (1951). We tend to forget Tragic America (1931) or America is Worth Saving (1941), his commentaries on Depression-era America. 

Tragic America was almost immediately banned from bookstores and libraries. The Carnegie Library in Pennsylvania reportedly burned all copies. America is Worth Saving was critically dismissed with few reviews. The fact Dreiser joined the Communist Party in 1945 made his political ideas all the more suspect and suppressed. 

Did Dreiser draw upon the ideas of Common Sense, Rights of Man and Age of Reason? In the spirit of Thomas Paine, Tragic America and America is Worth Saving reflect upon the undue political and economic might wielded by the wealthy and powerful, and its repercussions. One may view them as the American Crisis papers for those times that tried the souls of Depression-era Americans. 

A century before Occupy, Dreiser in Tragic America declared, “…this system — which the capitalists would have us believe to be the work of sheer fate — is actually no more and no less than the absolutely planned and executed method by which the banks bring on a state of prosperity for only 1% of the people.” 

Dreiser, like Paine, viewed oligarchy as a serious threat to ordinary Americans, who were sacrificed to rich overlords by a complicit government. Dreiser, like Paine, urged populist action: “We want a government for all the people! No enormous wealth in private hands! We want efficient managers for the benefit of all Americans!” 

Undeterred by the repression of Tragic America, Dreiser wrote America is Worth Saving (1941). His Paineite invective railed against European aristocracy and American corporate leaders poised to gain large profits from the war, whatever their view of Hitler. 

Dreiser saw little difference between Hitler’s armies and the British imperialist armies that enslaved and decimated Indians, Chinese, and South African blacks. He opposed U.S. military involvement until Germany invaded Russia and Japan attacked Pearl Harbor. 

Dreiser’s ideas appear to echo Paine’s criticisms of British imperialism in Pennsylvania Magazine and The Crisis. While Dreiser’s interpretations run counter to Paine’s belief that war is a threat to commerce, a similar pacifism and desire for enlightenment resonates.

The post Theodore Dreiser and Thomas Paine appeared first on .

Edited excerpt from “Here’s to Tom Paine — the Forgotten Founding Father,” originally published on Medium, June 10, 2024.

In 1789, Thomas Paine wrote to his American friend, Kitty Few Nicholson: 

A thousand years hence (for I must indulge in a few thoughts), perhaps in less, America maybe what England now is!…When we contemplate the fall of empires and the extinction of nations of the ancient world, we see but little to excite our regret than the mouldering ruins of pompous palaces, magnificent monuments…. of the most costly workmanship. But when the empire of America shall fall, the subject for contemplative sorrow will be infinitely greater than crumbling brass or marble can inspire. It will not then be said, here stood a temple of vast antiquity…. but here, ah painful thought! the noblest work of human wisdom, the grandest scene of human glory, the fair cause of freedom rose and fell! 

Today, 235 years later, we grapple with the same freedom issues confronting Paine and his British contemporaries. We may even say the situation is worse, given our knowledge and seemingly more abundant resources.

There’s little doubt Paine would probably be deeply disappointed with his adopted country — its downfall arriving much sooner than he anticipated. 

Much of what Paine wrote in Rights of Man about 18th century Britain fits 21st century America: 

When, in countries that are called civilised, we see age going to the workhouse and youth to the gallows, something must be wrong in the system of government. It would seem, by the exterior appearance of such countries, that all was happiness; but there lies hidden from the eye of common observation, a mass of wretchedness, that has scarcely any other chance, than to expire in poverty or infamy…. 

Civil government does not exist in executions; but in making such provision for the instruction of youth and the support of age, as to exclude, as much as possible, profligacy from the one and despair from the other. Instead of this, the resources of a country are lavished upon kings, upon courts, upon hirelings, impostors and prostitutes; and even the poor themselves, with all their wants upon them, are compelled to support the fraud that oppresses them. 

British Whig and Tory members of Parliament then pulled the strings of government with their riches. Today, American Democratic and Republican members of Congress (mostly millionaires and billionaires) continue the charade that social and economic equity prevails, that anyone can go from “rags to riches.” 

The U.S. pay-to-play system makes all candidates rely on their personal wealth and contributions from their deep-pocket donors. This guarantees only the voices of the rich are heard. Citizens United opened the door wide to corporate donations. 

Paine would not have been surprised. After all, he observed that: 

A change of ministers amounts to nothing. One goes out, another comes in, and still the same measures, vices, and extravagances are pursued. It signifies not who is minister. The defect lies in the system. The foundation and superstructure of the government is bad. Prop it as you please, it continually sinks and ever will.

The perception of a government rigged for the elites can explain both Occupy Wall Street in 2011 and the January 6, 2021 melee at the White House, where many had faced financial insecurity across the past decades. Again, Paine’s words are prescient: 

As a great mass of the community are thrown thereby into poverty and discontent, they are constantly on the brink of commotion… Whatever the apparent cause of any riots may be, the real one is always want of happiness. It shows that something is wrong in the system of government that injures the felicity by which society is to be preserved. 

I believe it’s no accident that current social beliefs and trends uncannily reflect those in the 18th and 19th centuries. Many Americans still believe that assistance to the poor encourages sloth. Meanwhile, there is little interest in funding public K-12 education or in making higher education more affordable. 

We are fully ensconced in 18th century style nepotism, indicated by the recently coined term, “nepobaby.” The idea of meritocracy is almost as much a sham today as it was back then. 

If Instagram and Tiktok offer clues, we still venerate “Old Money” as much as characters in any Jane Austen novel. Let’s not forget that the very ideas of old money in America is racist — given centuries of slavery while prohibiting immigration from Asia — for only whites were allowed to accumulate great wealth. 

If the top one percent chooses to blindly immerse themselves in the 18th century, perhaps it’s time for the rest of us to revisit Paine’s Rights of Man and right the wrongs ourselves. 

Enough is enough!

The post Rights of Man is More Relevant Now than Ever  appeared first on .

These lines from a children’s song richly capture the infamy that Thomas Paine had fallen into at the time of his death on June 8, 1809 in New Rochelle, New York:

Even with the passing of 215 years, Paine is still a relatively unknown figure despite his bestselling pamphlet, Common Sense (1776) which urged Americans to declare independence, and his popular American Crisis papers (1776–1783).

Read the full article:

https://medium.com/counterarts/heres-to-tom-paine-the-forgotten-founding-father-530f0c0fb3db?sk=8e5c8ed2d0e368b31dab245fa8e9a632

The post Here’s to Tom Paine—the Forgotten Founding Father appeared first on .

By Frances Chiu 

An incorrigible Europhile for much of my youth, I was not terribly interested in Thomas Paine. The fact that Ronald Reagan was an admirer of Paine didn’t help either: Paine must be a conservative, right? But then I realized that to understand William Blake’s revolutionary sentiment, I had to read Rights of Man, Paine’s defense of the French Revolution. 

As I turned the pages of Rights, I was pleasantly surprised. Wait, was he actually what we’d consider a liberal rather than a conservative? Paine challenged hereditary rule and privilege! He proposed welfare — along with progressive taxation, a prototype of Social Security, while sanctioning unions. I was blown away by his prescience, seeing that his words could as easily apply to 1993 as 1792:

When, in countries that are called civilized, we see age going to the workhouse and youth to the gallows, something must be wrong in the system of government. It would seem, by the exterior appearance of such countries, that all was happiness; but there lies hidden from the eye of common observation, a mass of wretchedness, that has scarcely any other chance, than to expire in poverty or infamy. 

Also appealing to me about Paine was his modern, accessible prose, so different from his 18th-century peers. He presents the most visionary ideas in the least pretentious language — for instance, this passage defending the rights of man: 

Though I mean not to touch upon any sectarian principle of religion, yet it may be worth observing that the genealogy of Christ is traced to Adam. Why then not trace the rights of man to the creation of man? I will answer the question. Because there have been upstart governments, thrusting themselves between, and presumptuously working to unmake man. 

Although the subject of my doctoral dissertation changed once I entered Oxford, I continued to study Paine. I admired him more when I read Age of Reason and articles from the Pennsylvania Magazine. 

In 2004, I gained a more complete picture of Paine as a man from reading John Keane’s biography of him. I almost fell head over heels in love with him. 

I was impressed that he donated all of his proceeds from Common Sense to the Continental Army. I was impressed that he walked from Trenton to Philadelphia one late December night to publish his first American Crisis paper. I was impressed that Paine didn’t just hang out with the wealthiest and most prominent men, but also appreciated the company of ordinary men. I was even more impressed by all his efforts to end slavery in America and his unusually appreciative views of Native Americans (or “Indians” as they were called). 

When I reached the end of the biography, I wept for him. How sad it was that Americans had forgotten his selfless efforts to win American independence and build the new country. How profoundly sad it was that only a mere handful of Americans — six people, including two Black youths — attended his funeral, given the tens of thousands who attended the public funerals of Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson. 

I became determined to remind other Americans of Paine’s contributions. I figured I would never get a chance to write academically about Paine since my PhD was in English literature, not history or political science, so I decided to teach the first class in the U.S. devoted to Paine and his contemporaries at The New School — 

“The Age of Paine: Religion, Revolution, and Radicalism” Three years later, shortly before Christmas, I organized a symposium there on Paine for the bicentenary of his death. I recall feeling astonished at the overflow crowd. Who would have imagined such a large turnout amid last-minute holiday shopping? 

Then the unimaginable happened: I was invited to submit a book proposal to Routledge on Paine’s Rights of Man, the very work that first made me a “Paineite.” I didn’t think it would ever happen because the majority of my publications had focused on the history of the Gothic novel. 

In writing a Routledge guide, I rediscovered why I admired Paine the way I do. In the wake of the financial crash of 2008, expansion of George W. Bush’s wars from two to seven, the crackdowns on freedom of the press and the right to protest, I realized Paine’s ideas within Rights of Man were quite possibly even more relevant today than when first published in 1792. 

Beyond Adams, Jefferson and Hamilton, Thomas Paine is the “founding father” we need to heed more than ever in these times that try our souls!

The post My Discovery and Love of Thomas Paine appeared first on .