A Live Reading of Thomas Paines Common Sense | LIVESTREAM BEGINS at 5 PM EDT

➡ The Untold History Channel is discussing Thomas Paine’s “Common Sense”. The discussion revolves around the idea of America’s potential for independence and its ability to build a strong navy using its own resources. Paine argues that America’s strength lies in unity, not numbers, and that the country is capable of repelling any force. He also suggests that a national debt can be a national bond if it doesn’t bear interest.
➡ The text argues that America, growing in wealth and size, needs to build its own navy for protection instead of relying on Britain. It suggests that America has the resources and skills to do so, and that having a navy would also protect American trade. The text also warns against the dangers of returning to British rule, suggesting it would lead to constant conflict. It concludes by emphasizing the importance of unity and self-reliance for the future of America.
➡ This text emphasizes the importance of establishing a government that protects freedom, property, and diverse religious beliefs. It warns against the dangers of a small, unequal representation in government and urges the necessity of independence for America. The text also highlights the need for foreign support and trade, which can only be achieved through independence. Lastly, it criticizes the King’s speech and calls for a strong response to uphold the nation’s tranquility.
➡ The text criticizes the King of England for his tyranny and disregard for the common good, suggesting that his actions have led to widespread hatred. It argues that America should focus on its own interests and growth, rather than supporting a power that has become a disgrace. The text also discusses the importance of America’s independence from Britain, stating that it’s inevitable and the longer it’s delayed, the harder it will be to achieve. Lastly, it mentions the military knowledge gained from the French and Indian wars, suggesting that this experience is crucial for America’s ability to defend itself.
➡ The text discusses the evolution of warfare tactics from the use of muskets to more accurate weapons, and how these changes influenced battles during the American Civil War. It also emphasizes the importance of using experience gained from previous wars, like the French and Indian wars, against the highly disciplined British army. The text further explores the complex issues of reconciliation and independence, highlighting the precarious state of America at the time, with no clear laws or government. It concludes by suggesting that America’s independence could be achieved through the legal voice of the people, military power, or a mob, and warns of the potential dangers of each method.
➡ The text discusses the importance of independence and unity, emphasizing that it’s a unique opportunity to create a fair and free society. It argues that independence is the only way to ensure peace and prosperity, and that it’s crucial to act now rather than delay. The text also suggests that everyone, regardless of their political beliefs, should support independence for the benefit of all. It concludes by calling for unity and the end of political divisions, urging everyone to work together for the common good.
➡ The speaker discusses the idea of amending the Constitution to align with modern values, as the language used in the original document is outdated and often misinterpreted. They also mention the potential for manipulation of the Constitution’s language to twist the form of government. The speaker then transitions to discussing their cat’s behavior and health, and ends with a fact about the speed of a snake’s strike.
➡ The speaker shares how quick a cat’s reflexes are, often resulting in scratched hands from play. They then mention an upcoming discussion on Tuesday, where they’ll talk about current events and other topics. The speaker appreciates the audience for tuning in and looks forward to their next meeting.

Well, looks like we’re live. Welcome, everybody, to the Untold History Channel. It is Sunday, 27th April, and we are here to. To complete the reading of Common Sense by Thomas Paine. And forgive my. My cat. He doesn’t, uh. He’s not a very good window, so. Poor buddy. But anyway, okay. Sorry about that. Are you still there? Yeah, I’m here. Yeah, he. He stepped on something and caused some craziness to go on. So anyway, we are here and we’re gonna. We’re gonna. Let’s see. Let’s just go. Go ahead and jump into the. I’m gonna. I’m gonna basically let you have the entire screen with.

Right, you’re gonna run the pages. That’s good. You can’t hear me when I do that, so. All right, well, I’m gonna be here. So if you need this. If you need me for anything, I’ll be here, but I’m gonna remove myself so that you can go ahead and read. But what you said. What page were you on? So we’re on PA Presentability of America with some miscellaneous reflections. Okay. And this is a pretty good chunk that we have left to go here. So if we can’t get it today, then don’t. No, no pressure. We can. We can always come back and do a fourth.

A fourth. Okay. Let’s see where we get. How. How people like where we’re. You know, how it’s going. What’s. What’s it? What’s worse? I’m on it. I’m page 54, but I have different pagination than you, so it’s the. But pretty close in pagination. What’s it? What’s it? It’s of the presentability of America with some miscellaneous reflections. So that’s all I can tell you of the. I think we hit secondly. Let me see if I can do a search. We got all the way up to. To this next. I don’t know that I’d call it a chapter, but second, you said.

You said what, What, What. What was the present of the present ability of America with some miscellaneous reflections where he talks about timing. Oh, here we go. Here we go. Here we go. So I have it on. It’s for me. It’s on page 60. Yeah, we have different. So, yeah, like I said, so. Okay. All right, well, I’ve got this zoomed up to 400 so people can read it. And I’m going to remove. I remove myself here. Okay. And I’ll let you go. And when you’re ready. When When. When we’re done, we’ll just. Well, I’ll. I’ll pop back in.

Okay. So it is all you. I have never met with a man, either in England or America, who have not confessed his opinion that a separation between the countries would take place one time or other. And there is no instance in which we have shown less judgment than in. Than in an ever. Gosh. Than in endeavoring to describe what we call the ripeness or fitness of the continent for independence. As all men allow the measure and vary only in their opinion of the time. Let us, in order to remove mistakes, take a general survey of things.

And endeavor, if possible, to find out the very time. But we need not go far. The inquiry ceases at once. For the time hath found us the general concurrence. The glorious union of all things. Prove the fact it is not in numbers but in unity that our great strength lies. Yet our present numbers are sufficient to repel the force of all the world. The continent hath at this time the largest body of armed and disciplined men of any power under heaven. And is just arrived at that pitch of strength in which no single colony is able to support its itself and the whole, when united, can accomplish the matter.

And either more or less than this might be fatal in its effects. Our land force is already sufficient. And as to naval affairs, we cannot be insensible. That Britain would never suffer an American man of war to be built while the continent remained in her hands. Wherefore we should be no forwarder an hundred years hence in that branch than we are now. But the truth is, we should be less so. Because the timber of the country is every day diminishing. And that which will remain at last will be far off and difficult to procure. Were the continent crowded with inhabitants, her sufferings under the present circumstances would be intolerable.

The more seaport towns we had, the more should we have both to defend and to lose. Our present numbers are so happily proportioned to our wants that no man need be idle. The diminution of trade affords an army. And the necessities of an army create a new trade. Debts, we have none. And whatever we may contract on this account will serve as a glorious memento of our virtue. Can we but leave prosperity with a settled form of government. An independent constitution of its own? The purchase at any price will be cheap. But to expend millions for the sake of getting a few vile acts repealed and routing the present ministry only is unworthy the charge.

And is using posterity with the utmost cruelty. Because it is leaving them the great work to do, and a debt upon their backs, from which they derive no advantage. Such a thought is unworthy a man of honor, and is the true characteristic of a narrow heart and a peddling politician. The debt we may contract doth not deserve our regard, if the work be but accomplished. No nation ought to be without a debt. A national debt is a national bond, and when it bears no interest is in no case a grievance. Britain is oppressed with a debt of upwards of 140 million sterling, for which she pays upwards of four millions interest and as a compensation for her debt she has a large navy.

America is without a debt and without a navy. Yet for the 20th part of the English national debt could have a navy as large. Again, the navy of England is not worth at this time more than three millions and a half sterling. The first and second editions of this pamphlet were published without the following calculations, which are now given as a proof that the above estimation of the navy is a just one. See Entic’s Naval History, intro, page 56. The charge of building a ship of each rate and furnishing her with masts, yards, sails and rigging together with a proportion of eight months.

Boatswain’s and Carpenters, Sea Stores, as calculated by Mr. Burchett, Secretary to the Navy. And here we have a list, and I don’t have to read it all, but for a ship of 100 guns would be £35,553 sterling. And he lists all the way down to a ship of 20 guns for £3,710 sterling. And from hence it is easy to sum up the value or cost rather of the whole British navy, which in the year 1757, when it was at its greatest glory, consisted of the following ships and guns. Let’s see, ships. And here’s I’m going to do the same thing with this list.

Six ships, 100 guns, cost of 135, 553 pounds sterling. Cost of all 213,318 pounds sterling, all the way up to 58 ships with 20 guns, cost of 1 3,710 pounds sterling. Cost of all 215, 180 pounds sterling. And then he adds also sloops, bombs and fire ships, one with another 85 ships, cost of 1£2,000, cost of all £170,000, with a total including remains for guns, £3,500,000 sterling. No country on the globe is so happily situated so internally capable of raising a fleet as America. Tar, timber, iron and cordage are her natural produce. We need go abroad for nothing.

Whereas the Dutch, who make large profits by hiring out their ships of war to the Spaniards and Portuguese. Are obliged to import most of the materials they use. We ought to view the building a fleet as an article of commerce. It being the natural manufactory of this country. It is the best money we can lay out. A navy, when it is finished, is worth more than a cot than it costs. And is that nice point in national policy. In which commerce and protection are united. Let us build. If we want them not, we can sell. And by that means replace our paper currency with ready gold and silver.

In point of manning a fleet, people in general run into great errors. It is not necessary that one fourth part should be sailor. The terrible privateer Captain Death. Stood the hottest engagement of any ship last war. Yet had not 20 sailors on board. Though her complement of men was upwards of 200. A few able and social sailors. Will soon instruct a sufficient number of active landmen. In the common work of a ship. Wherefore we never can be more capable to begin on maritime matters than now, while our timber is standing, our fisheries blocked up. And our sailors and shipwrights out of employ.

Men of war of 70 and 80 guns were built 40 years ago in New England. And why not the same now? Shipbuilding is America’s greatest pride. And in which she will in time excel the whole world. The great empires of the east are mostly inland. And consequently excluded from the possibility of rivaling her. Africa is in a state of barbarism. And no power in Europe hath either such an extent of coast. Or such an internal supply of materials. Where nature hath, given the one she hath withheld the other to America only hath she been liberal of both.

The vast empire of Russia is almost shut out from the sea. Wherefore her boundless forests, her tar, iron and cordage. Are only articles of commerce. In point of safety. Ought we to be without a fleet. We are not the little people now which we were 60 years ago. @ that time we might have trusted our property in the streets or fields rather. And slept securely without locks or bolts to our doors or windows. The case now is altered. And our methods of defence ought to improve. With our increase of property. A common pirate 12 months ago might have come up the Delaware.

And laid the city of Philadelphia under instant contribution for what sum he pleased. And the same might have happened to other places. Nay, any daring fellow in a brig of 14 or 16 guns. Might have robbed the whole continent and carried off half a million of money. There are circumstances which demand our attention. These are circumstances which demand our attention and point out the necessity of naval protection. Some, perhaps will say that after we have made it up with Britain, she will protect us. Can we be so unwise as to mean that she shall keep a navy in our harbors for that purpose? Common sense will tell us that the power which hath endeavoured to subdue us is of all others the most improper to defend us, conquest may be effected under the pretence of friendship, and ourselves, after a long and brave resistance, be at last cheated into slavery.

And if her ships are not to be admitted into our harbors, I would ask, how is she to protect us? A navy three or four thousand miles off can be of little use, and on sudden emergencies, none at all. Wherefore, if we must hereafter protect ourselves, why not do it for ourselves? Why do it for another? The English list of ships of war is long and formidable, but not a tenth part of them are at any time fit for service. Numbers of them not in being, yet their names are pompously continued in the list as if only a plank be left of the ship, and not a fifth part of such as are fit for service can be spared on any one station at one time.

The east and West Indies, Mediterranean, Africa, and other parts over which Britain extends her claim make large demands upon her navy. From a mixture of prejudice and inattention, we have contracted a false notion respecting the navy of England, and we have talked as if we should have the whole of it to encounter at once. And for that reason, suppose that we must have one as large which, not being instantly practicable, have been made use of by a set of disguised Tories to discourage our beginning thereon. Nothing can be farther from truth than this. For if America had only a 20th part of the naval force of Britain, she would be by far an overmatch for her, because, as we neither have nor claim any foreign dominion, our whole force would be employed.

Can I pause you for a quick second? Because I think. I think there’s. There’s one point in here that I don’t think a lot of people may not. May not know and what a Tory is when he talks about disguised Tories. Here, a Tory is somebody who was. Who was loyal to England. So if they’re disguised Tories meant that. Meant that they were a person that was maybe pretending to be loyal to the independent movements, but they were really more spies for the British. So just. Just for con. Just for contextual points. Yeah, if. If you’re reading.

If people. If you’re reading this, people may not understand that, so. Okay. Anyway, I. I don’t mean to interrupt you, but I just thought that might be a. An important something. Something to. To highlight. Yeah, that’s a good point. And I. I actually was wanting to mention that. I’m sure people have noticed and. Howdy, everybody. How Trump has been talking about how we need to build back our navy, and we are the best shipbuilders in the world, and it’s just interesting to be reading Tom Payne saying the exact same thing at this time. Still true? Absolutely.

Okay, so let’s see where this was. Our whole force would be. Our whole force would be employed on our own coast. Blah, blah, blah. You can start with nothing. Nothing can be further from the truth than this. Yeah, nothing can be farther from truth than this. For if America had only a 20th part of the naval force of Britain, she would be by far an overreach for her. Because as we neither have nor claim any foreign dominion, our whole force would be employed on our own coast, where we should in the long run have two to one the advantage of those who had three or four thousand miles to sail over before they could attack us and the same distance to return in order to refit and recruit.

And although Britain by her fleet hath a check over our trade to Europe, we have as large a one over her trade to the West Indies, which by laying in the neighborhood of the continent is entirely at its mercy. Some method might be fallen on to keep up a naval force in time of peace, if we should not judge it necessary to support a constant navy. If premiums were to be given to merchants to build and employ in their service ships mounted with 20, 30, 40 or 50 guns, the premiums to be in proportion to the loss of bulk to the merchants, 50 or 60 of those ships with a few guard ships on constant duty would keep up a sufficient navy.

And that without burdening ourselves with the evil so loudly complained of in England of suffering, their fleet in time of peace, to lie rotting in the docks to unite the sinews of commerce and defense, is sound policy. For when our strength and our riches play into each other’s hand, we need fear no external enemy. See, I think this is what Trump is thinking. In almost every article of defense, we abound hemp flourishes even to rankness, so that we need not want cordage. Our iron is superior to that of other countries. Are small arms equal to any in the world? Cannons.

We can Cast at pleasure saltpetre and gunpowder we are every day producing. Our knowledge is hourly improving. Resolution is Our inherent character. And courage hath never yet forsaken us. Wherefore, what is it that we want? Why is it that we hesitate? From Britain we can expect nothing but ruin. If she is once admitted to the government of America again this continent will not be worth living in. Jealousies will be always arising. Insurrections will be constantly happening. And who will go forth to quell them? Who will venture his life to reduce his own countrymen to a foreign obedience? The difference between Pennsylvania and Connecticut Respecting some unlocated lands.

Shows the insignificance of a British government. And fully proves that nothing but a continental authority can regulate continental matters. Another reason why the present time is preferable to all others. Is that the fewer our numbers are, the more land there is yet unoccupied. Which, instead of being lavished by the king on his worthless dependence, May be hereafter applied not only to the discharge of the present debt. But to the constant support of government. No nation under heaven hath such an advantage as this. The infant state of the colonies, as it is called, so far from being against, Is an argument in favor of independence.

We are sufficiently numerous, and were we more so, we might be less united. It is a matter worthy of observation that the more a country is peopled, the smaller their armies are. In military numbers, the ancients far exceeded the moderns. And the reason is evident for trade being the consequence of population. Men become too much absorbed thereby to attend to anything else. Commerce diminishes the spirit both of patriotism and military defense. And history sufficiently informs us that the bravest achievements were always accomplished. In the non age of a nation. With the increase of commerce, England hath lost its spirit.

The city of London, notwithstanding its numbers, Submits to continued insults with the patience of a coward. The more men have to lose, the less willing they are to venture. The rich are, in general slaves. To fear and submit to courtly power. With the trembling duplicity of a spaniel. Youth is the seed time of good habits. As well in nations as in individuals. It might be difficult, if not impossible, to form the continent into one government half a century hence. The vast variety of interests occasioned by an increase of trade and population Would create confusion. Colony would be against colony.

Each being able might scorn each other’s assistance. And while the proud and foolish gloried in their little distinctions, the wise would lament that the union had not been formed before. Wherefore the present time is the true time for establishing it. The intimacy which is contracted in infancy and the friendship which is formed in misfortune are of all others the most lasting and unalterable. Our present union is marked with both these characters. We are young, and we have been distressed, but our concord hath withstood our troubles. And fixes a memorable area for posterity to glory in the present time.

Likewise is that peculiar time which never happens to a nation but once. That is the time of forming itself in. Into a government. Most nations have let slip the opportunity and by that means have been compelled to receive laws from their conquerors. Instead of making laws for themselves. First they had a king and then a form of government, Whereas the articles or charter of government should be formed first and men delegated to execute them afterwards. But from the errors of other nations let us learn wisdom and lay hold of the present opportunity to begin government at the right end.

When William the Conqueror subdued England, he gave them law at the point of the sword. And until we consent that the seat of government in America be legally and authoritatively occupied, we shall be in danger of having it filled by some fortunate ruffian who may treat us in the same manner. And then where will be our freedom? Where our property? As to religion, I hold it to be the indispensable duty of all government to protect all conscientious professors thereof. And I know of no other business which government hath to do therewith. Let a man throw aside that narrowness of soul, that selfishness of principle, which the niggards of all professions are so unwilling to part with, and he will be at once delivered of his fears on that head.

Suspicion is the companion of mean souls and the bane of all good society. For myself, I fully and conscientiously believe that it is the will of the Almighty that there should be diversity of religious opinions among us. It affords a larger field for our Christian kindness. Were we all of one way of thinking, our religious dispositions would want matter for probation. And on this liberal principle I look on the various denominations among us to be like children of the same family, differing only in what is called their Christian names. I’ve already threw out a few thoughts on the propriety of a continental charter.

For I only presume to offer hints, not plans. And in this place I take the liberty of re mentioning the subject by observing that a charter is to be understood as a bond of solemn obligation which the whole enters into to support the right of every separate part, whether or religion, personal freedom or property. A firm bargain and a right Reckoning make long friends. In a former page, I likewise mentioned the necessity of a large and equal representation. And there is no political matter which more deserves our attention. A small number of electors or a small number of representatives are equally dangerous.

But if the number of representatives be not only small but unequal, the danger is increased. As an instance of this, I mention the. When the associators petition was before the house of assembly of Pennsylvania, 28 members only were present. All the Bucks county members, being eight, voted against it. And had seven of the Chester members done the same. This whole province had been governed by two counties only. And this danger it is always exposed to the unwarrantable stretch likewise which that house made in their last sitting. To gain an undue authority over the delegates of that province.

Ought to warn the people at large how they trust power out of their own hands. A set of instructions for the delegates were put together. Which, in point of sense and business would have dishonoured a schoolboy. And after being approved by a few, a very few without doors were carried into the house and there passed in behalf of the whole colony. Whereas did the whole colony know with what ill will that house hath entered on some necessary public measures. They would not hesitate a moment to think them unworthy of such a trust. Immediate necessity makes many things convenient.

Which, if continued, would grow into oppressions. Expedients and right are different things. When the calamities of America required a consultation. There was no method so ready or at that time so proper. As to appoint persons from the several houses of assembly for that purpose. And the wisdom with which they have proceeded hath preserved this continent from ruin. But, as it is more than probable that we shall never be without a Congress. Every well wisher to good order must own that the mode for choosing members of that body deserves consideration. And I put it as a question to those who make a study of mankind.

Whether representation and election is not too great a power for one and the same body of men to possess. When we are planning for posterity, we ought to remember that virtue is not hereditary. It is from our enemies that we often gain excellent maxims. And are frequently surprised into reason by their mistakes. Mr. Cornwall, one of the lords of the treasury. Treated the petition of the New York assembly with contempt. Because that house, he said, consisted but of 26 members. Which trifling number, he argued, could not with decency be put for the whole. We thank him for his involuntary honesty.

To conclude, however strange it may appear to some. Or however unwilling they may be to think so. Matters not. But many strong and striking reasons may be given to show that nothing can settle our affairs so expeditiously as an open and determined declaration for independence. Some of which, first, it is the custom of nations, when any two are at war, for some other powers, not engaged in the quarrel, to step in as mediators and bring about the preliminaries of a peace. But while America calls herself the subject of Great Britain, no power, however well disposed she may be, can offer her mediation.

Wherefore, in our present state we may quarrel on forever. Secondly, it is unreasonable to suppose that France or Spain will give us any kind of assistance, if we mean only to make use of that assistance for the purpose of repairing the breach and strengthening the connection between Britain and America, because those powers would be sufferers by the consequences. Thirdly, while we profess ourselves the subjects of Britain, we must, in the eye of foreign nations, be considered as rebels. The precedent is somewhat dangerous to their peace for men to be in arms under the name of subjects.

We, on the spot can solve the paradox. But to unite resistance and subjection requires an idea much too refined for the common understanding. Fourthly, were a manifesto to be published and dispatched to foreign courts, setting forth the miseries we have endured and the peaceable methods we have ineffectually used for redress. Declaring at the same time that, not being able any longer to live happily or safely under the cruel disposition of the British court, we had been driven to the necessity of breaking off all connections with her, at the same time assuring all courts of our peaceable disposition towards them and of our desire of entering into trade with them.

Such a memorial would produce more good effects to this continent than if a ship were freighted with petitions to Britain. Under our present denomination of British subjects, we can neither be received nor heard abroad. The custom of all courts is against us, and will be so until, by an independence we take rank with other nations. These proceedings may at first appear strange and difficult, but, like all other steps which we have already passed over, will in a little time become familiar and agreeable. And until an independence is declared, the continent will feel itself like a man who continues putting off some unpleasant business from day to day, yet knows it must be done, hates to set about it, wishes it over, and is continually haunted with the thoughts of its necessity.

So that takes us to the appendix. Since the publication of the first edition of this pamphlet, or rather on the same day on which it came out, the King’s speech made its appearance in this city, had the spirit of prophecy directed the Birth of this production, it could not have brought it forth at a more seasonable juncture or at a more necessary time. The bloody mindedness of the one show the necessity of pursuing the doctrine of the other. Men read by way of revenge and the speech instead of terrifying. And I think that’s Men read by way of revenge and the speech instead of terrifying prepared a way for the manly principles of independence, ceremony, and even silence, from whatever motive they may arise, have a hurtful tendency when they give the least degree of countenance to base and wicked performances.

Wherefore, if this maxim be admitted, it naturally follows that the king’s speech, as being a piece of finished villainy, deserved and still deserves a general execration, both by the congress and the people. Yet, as the domestic tranquility of a nation Depends greatly on the chastity of what may properly be called national manners, it is often better to pass some things over in silent disdain Than to make use of such new methods of dislike as might introduce the least innovation on that guardian of our peace and safety. And perhaps it is chiefly owing to this prudent delicacy that the king’s speech hath not before now suffered a public execution.

The speech, if it may be called one, Is nothing better than a wilful, audacious libel against the truth, the common good, and the existence of mankind. And is a formal and pompous method of offering up human sacrifices to the pride of tyrants. But this general massacre of mankind is one of the privileges and the certain consequence of kings. For as nature knows them not, they know not her. And although they are beings of our own creating, they know not us, and are become the gods of their creators. The speech hath one good quality, which is that it is not calculated to deceive.

Neither can we, even if we would be deceived by it. Brutality and tyranny appear on the face of it. It leaves us at no loss. And every line convinces, even in the moment of reading, that he who hunts the words for prey, the naked and untutored Indian, is less a savage than the king of Britain. Sir John Dalrymple, the putative father of a whining Jesuitical piece Fallaciously called the address of the people of England to the inhabitants of America, hath perhaps from a vain supposition that the people here were to be frightened at the pomp and description of a king given, though very unwisely on his part, the real character of the present one.

But, says this writer, if you are inclined to pay compliments to an administration which we do not complain of, meaning the Marquess of Rockingham’s at the repeal of the Stamp Act. It is very unfair in you to withhold them from that prince by whose nod alone they were permitted to do anything. This is Toryism with a witness. Here is idolatry even without a mask. And he who can so calmly hear and digest such doctrine hath forfeited his claim to rationality. An apostate. An apostate from the order of manhood. And ought to be considered as one who hath not only given up the proper dignity of a man, but sunk himself beneath the rank of animals and contemptibly crawls through the world like a worm.

However, it matters very little now what the King of England either says or does. He hath wickedly broken through every moral and human obligation, trampled nature and conscience beneath his feet, and by a steady and constitutional spirit of insolence and cruelty, procured for himself and universal hatred. It is now the interest of America to provide for herself. She hath already a large and young family whom it is more her duty to take care of than to be granting away her property to support a power who is become a reproach to the names of men and Christians.

Ye whose office it is to watch over the morals of a nation of whatsoever sect or denomination ye are of, as well as ye who are more immediately the guardians of the public liberty. If ye wish to preserve your native country uncontaminated by European corruption, ye must in secret wish a separation. But leaving the moral part to private reflection, I shall chiefly confine my farther remarks to the following. First, that it is the interest of America to be separated from Britain. Secondly, which is the easiest and most practicable plan, reconciliation or independence? With some occasional remarks in support of the first, I could, if I judged it proper, produce the opinion of some of the ablest and most experienced men on this continent and whose sentiments on that head are not yet publicly known.

It is, in reality a self evident position. For no nation in a state of foreign dependence, limited in its commerce and cramped and fettered in its legislative powers, can ever arrive at any material eminence. America doth not yet know what opulence is. And although the progress which she hath made stands unparalleled in the history of other nations. It is but childhood compared with what she would be capable of arriving at had she, as she ought to have, the legislative powers in her own hands. England is at this time proudly coveting what would do her no good were she to accomplish it.

And The Continent hesitating on a matter which will be her final ruin if neglected. It is the commerce and not the conquest of America by which England is to be benefited. And that would in a great measure continue were the countries as independent of each other as France and Spain. Because in many articles neither can go to a better market. But it is the independence of this country, of Britain or any other which is now the main and only object worthy of contention and which, like all other truths discovered by necessity, will appear clearer and stronger every day.

First, because it will come to that one time or other. Secondly, because the longer it is delayed, the harder it will be to accomplish. I have frequently amused myself, both in public and private companies with silently remarking the specious errors of those who speak without reflecting. And among the many which I have heard, the following seems most general. That is, that had this rupture happened 40 or 50 years hence, instead of now, the continent would have been more able to have shaken off the dependence to which I reply that our military ability at this time arises from the experience gained in the last war and which in 40 or 50 years time would have been totally extinct.

The continent would not by that time have had a general or even a military officer left. And we or those who may succeed us would have been as ignorant of martial matters as the ancient Indians. Let me pause you for a second because again, for context, what he’s talking about here is he’s talking about the French and Indian wars that happened in the 17, late 1750s, early 1760s. It was about a seven year conflict between the French, they call the French Indian wars. And that’s essentially what brought all of the British troops over to the continent.

Prior to the French and Indian wars, there really wasn’t a very large contingent of British soldiers in the con or on the continent. So when they came over to fight the French and Indians, you know, for basically control of the new world, that was when they, they brought all these troops over, but they didn’t leave. That was, and that was what built up a lot of the resentment by the colonials towards the British. So, and what he’s talking about here in terms of the, the military knowledge of conflict, you know, battle is from that particular war.

So yes, a lot of people may not understand that. So again, just, just for context, that’s what he’s talking about here, right? That recent experience that in 40 or 50 years they, who knows, might not have. Well, I mean, I mean, let’s take, let’s take a look at it. Not to derail Too, too, too big. But, I mean, you know, we. We have. Every time that there’s a new conflict, for the most part, the tactics have The. The tactics do not change. I’m sure you’ve heard the term that the militaries always fight the last war, meaning that the tactics that they employ are the tactics that they used in the war previous.

So World War I was. You know, a lot of World War I was trench warfare, which, if people know exactly what happened towards the end of the American War of Northern Aggression, that was what happened out right outside of Petersburg where it was. It was trench warfare that Petersburg was. I think that that battle lasted for probably six months, but it was all trenches, which was essential rehearsal for World War I. But the, you know, World War II wasn’t anything like it. But if you look at how the Americans fought at the beginning of the Civil War, they would line up all of their troops.

Well, the. They would line up all their troops in a line just like they would in the, you know, back in, oh, you know, like the Napoleonic wars or how the British would line up all their. All their troops. And the primary reason they would do that is because the muskets were. You had a lead ball that you would put into the musket, and then when you. And you’d put powder into it, you’d put the ball down in, pound it in, and then you would light a charge. And what it would do is the ball would then come out, but the ball wasn’t rifled.

And it would. It would bounce in the chamber. It would bounce in the barrel as it was going down, because there was no rifle in the barrel. So what you would do is you’d. You’d literally have a. A ball that could come out in like a paint. If everybody. If anybody’s ever played paintball, you know, you. You fire a paintball, and it’ll go. Whoo. It’ll go way off into the. It’ll. It’ll spin off. Well, that’s kind of what was going on with the muskets of the day. That’s why they would line all their guys up so that they could get the mass.

The most effective use of essentially a shotgun. But by the time the. By the time the American Civil War came out, they had the mini ball, which was a concave kind of like. It wasn’t a ball. It was actually more of like a. It was a projectile that would. That would expand at the edge with rifling in the barrel. And so you would actually have that ball coming out Spinning like a football and you would get a very accurate shot. So, but the, but in, in the, in the Civil War, they fought using the tactics that they did from the Revolution.

Yeah. So anyway, that guerrilla warfare 100%. The. So the, and the point I’m trying to make here is, is that from looking, looking at, from a military tactician standpoint, these, the, the military veterans that were left over from the French and Indian wars, they would not have had the ability to fight the British because the British are actually fighting the, the French at the time. So, I mean, you had a lot of veterans and there was no, there was really no better army on the planet more disciplined than the British army at that moment in time.

So it was very important to utilize the skills that they gained from the French and Indian wars to their advantage. And that’s what he’s talking about here. Awesome. Good context. So this single position, closely attended to, still unanswerably prove that the present time is preferable to all others. The argument turns thus at the conclusion of the last war we had experience, but wanted numbers, and 40 or 50 years hence, we should have numbers without experience. Wherefore, the proper point of time must be some particular point between the two extremes in which a sufficiency of the former remains and a proper increase of the latter is obtained, and that point of time is the present time.

The reader will pardon this digression as it does not properly come under the head I first set out with, and to which I again return by the following position. Should affairs be patched up with Britain and she to remain the governing and sovereign power of America, which, as matters are now circumstanced, is giving up the point entirely. We shall deprive ourselves of the very means of sinking the debt we have, or may contract. The value of the back lands which some of the provinces are clandestinely deprived of by the unjust extension of the limits of Canada, valued only at five pounds sterling per hundred acres, amount to upwards of 25 millions Pennsylvania currency, and the quit rents at one penny sterling per acre to two millions yearly.

It is by the sale of those lands that the debt may be sunk without burden to any, and the quit rent reserved thereon will always lessen, and in time will wholly support the yearly expense of government. It matters not how long the debt is in paying, so that the lands, when sold be applied to the discharge of it, and for the execution of which the Congress for the time being will be the Continental Trustees. I proceed now to the second head, which is the easiest and most practicable Plan, reconciliation or independence with some occasional remarks. He who takes nature for his guide is not easily beaten out of his argument.

And on that ground I answer generally. That independence, being a single simple line contained within ourselves, and reconciliation, a matter exceedingly perplexed and complicated, and in which a treacherous, capricious court is to interfere, gives the answer without a doubt. The present state of America is truly alarming to every man who is capable of reflection without law, without government, without any other motive power than what is founded on and granted by courtesy, held together by an unexampled concurrence of sentiment, which is nevertheless subject to change, and which every secret enemy is endeavoring to dissolve. Our present condition is legislation without law, wisdom without a plan, constitution without a name, and what is strangely astonishing, perfect independence contending for dependence.

The instance is without a precedent. The case never existed before, and who can tell what may be the event? The property of no man is secure in the present unbraced system of things. The mind of the multitude is left at random, and seeing no fixed object before them, they pursue such as fancy or opinion starts. Nothing is criminal. There is no such thing as treason. Wherefore every one thinks himself at liberty to act as he pleases. The Tories dared not have assembled offensively had they known that their lives by that act were forfeited to the laws of the state.

A line of distinction should be drawn between English soldiers taken in battle. And inhabitants of America taken in arms. The first are prisoners, but the latter traitors. The one forfeits his liberty, the other his head. Notwithstanding our wisdom, there is a visible feebleness in some of our proceedings which gives encouragement to dissensions. The Continental belt is too loosely buckled, and if something is not done in time it will be too late to do anything, and we shall fall into a state in which neither reconciliation nor independence will be practicable. The king and his worthless adherents are got at their old game of dividing the continent.

And there are not Wanting among us printers who will be busy spreading specious falsehoods. The artful and hypocritical letter which appeared a few months ago in two of the New York papers and likewise in two others, is an evidence that there are men who want either judgment or honesty. It is easy getting into holes and corners and talking of reconciliation. But do such men seriously consider how difficult the task is and how dangerous it may prove should the continent divide thereon? Do they take within their view all the various orders of men whose situation and circumstances, as well as their own, are to be Considered therein do they put themselves in the place of the sufferer, whose all is already gone, and of the soldier who hath quitted all for the defence of his country.

If their ill judged moderation be suited to their own private situations only, regardless of others, the event will convince them that they are reckoning without their host. Put us, say some on the footing we were on in 63, to which I answer, the request is not now in the power of Britain to comply with neither will she propose it. But if it were, and even should be granted, I ask as a reasonable question, by what means is such a corrupt and faithless court to be kept to its engagements? Another Parliament, nay, even the present, may hereafter repeal the obligation on the pretense of its being violently obtained or unwisely granted.

And in that case, where is our redress? No going to law with nations. Cannon are the barristers of crowns, and the sword not of justice, but of war, decides the suit to be on the footing of 63. It is not sufficient that the laws only be put on the same state, but that our circumstances likewise be put on the same state, our burnt and destroyed towns repaired or built up, our private losses made good, our public debts contracted for defense discharged. Otherwise we shall be millions worse than we were at that enviable period. Such a request, had it been complied with a year ago, would have won the heart and soul of the continent.

But now it is too late. The Rubicon is past. Besides, the taking up arms merely to enforce the repeal of a pecuniary law seems as unwarrantable by the divine law, and as repugnant to human feelings, as the taking up arms to enforce obedience thereto. The object on either side doth not justify the means, for the lives of men are too valuable to be cast away on such trifles. It is the violence which is done and threatened to our persons the destruction of our property by an armed force, the invasion of our country by fire and sword, which conscientiously qualifies the use of arms, and the instant in which such a mode of defence became necessary, all subjection to Britain ought to have ceased, and the independency of America should have been considered as dating its era from and published in the first musket that was fired against her.

This line is a line of consistency, neither drawn by caprice, nor extended by ambition, but produced by a chain of events of which the colonies were not the authors. I shall conclude these remarks with the following timely and well intended hints. We ought to reflect that there are three different ways by which an independency may hereafter be affected, and that one of those three will one day or other be the fate of America. That is, by the legal voice of the people in congress, by a military power, or by a mob. It may not always happen that our soldiers are citizens and the multitude a body of reasonable men.

Virtue, as I have already remarked, is not hereditary, neither is it perpetual. Should an independency be brought about by the first of those means, 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. A situation similar to the present hath not happened since the days of Noah until now. The birthday of a new world is at hand, and a race of men, perhaps as numerous as all Europe contains, are to receive their portion of freedom from the event of a few months.

The reflection is awful, and in this point of view, how trifling, how ridiculous do the little paltry cavillings of a few weak or interested men appear when weighed against the business of a world. Should we neglect the present favorable and inviting period and an independence be hereafter effected by any other means, we must charge the consequence to ourselves, or to those, rather, whose narrow and prejudiced souls are habitually opposing the measure without either inquiring or reflecting. There are reasons to be given in support of independence which men should rather privately think of than be publicly told of.

We ought not now to be debating whether we shall be independent or not, but anxious to accomplish it on a firm, secure, and honorable basis. And uneasy rather, that it is not yet begun upon every day, convinces us of its necessity. Even the Tories, if such beings yet remain among us, should of all men be the most solicitous to promote it. For as the appointment of committees at first protected them from popular rage, so a wise and well established form of government will be the only certain means of continuing it securely to them. Wherefore, if they have not virtue enough to be Whigs, they ought to have prudence enough to wish for independence.

In short, independence is the only bond that can tie and keep us together. We shall then see our object, and our ears will be legally shut against the schemes of an intriguing as well as a cruel enemy. We shall then, too be on a proper footing to treat with Britain, for there is no reason to conclude that the pride of that court will be less hurt by treating with the American states for terms of peace than with those with whom she dominates rebellious subjects for terms of accommodation. It is our delaying it that encourages her to hope for conquest.

And our backwardness tends only to prolong the war, as we have, without any good effect therefrom withheld our trade to obtain a redress of our grievances. Let us now try the alternative by independently redressing them ourselves and then offering, then offering to open the trade. The mercantile and reasonable part in England will still be with us, because peace with trade is preferable to war without it. And if this offer be not accepted, other courts may be applied to on these grounds. I rest the matter. And as no offer hath yet been made to refute the doctrine contained in the former editions of this pamphlet, it is a negative proof that either the doctrine cannot be refuted or.

Or that the party in favor of it are too numerous to be opposed. Wherefore, instead of gazing at each other with suspicious or doubtful curiosity, let each of us hold out to his neighbor the hearty hand of friendship and unite in drawing a line which, like an act of oblivion, shall bury in forgetfulness every former dissension. Let the names of Whig and Tory be extinct, and let none other be heard among us than those of a good citizen, an open and resolute friend, and a virtuous supporter of the rights of mankind and of the free and independent States of America.

End of Common Sense by Thomas Paine. Yep. And then it’s this. There’s a bunch of. Bunch of other stuff in here that really is kind of inconsequential. So that was. That was very good. That was very good. I thought it was, you know, some, Several things in there that could be attributed to today talking about war without trade or peace without trade. Rather, you know, look at what, in my opinion, you look at what Trump is trying to do. He. He wants to have trade. He didn’t want. He doesn’t want war, he wants trade. He says over and over, he does not want war, he wants peace.

He said it over and over and over. And his first term demonstrates that. And I, you know, I know a lot of people are like, oh, he’s a Zionist and he’s trying to fight Israeli’s wars. And I’m like, yeah, well, you know, again, you know, he could say one thing, but watch what he does. Yeah, watch what he does. Anyone does. It’s always what they do. Not. Right. That’s what always matters, not what they say, what they do. So. But, yeah, very, very good. Very, very good stuff here. Yeah, that’s powerful. That ending kind of gives Me chills.

Absolutely. You know, resolute. And this, you know, it’s still calling to the same people. I feel like it’s calling out. We’re dealing with the same thing. Only as he points out, it’s so much more complicated now because we’re so much more numerous and so much more has happened, especially when it comes to, say, religious freedom, but. Right. That’s another matter. But it’s calling on the same people of the same character, the same kind of people that, you know, that fought the war and that he was calling on then to understand. And the points he makes are.

Are so. It’s just so clear, you know, what do you think? If you don’t fight this war, it’s going to go really well and Britain’s going to treat us really well all of a sudden. You know, I mean, they pat. Like you said, they pat. The Rubicon has passed. Yeah. And here we are still. I wonder how many people. I wonder how many people understand what the Rubicon means. Why don’t you tell them? This is untold history. This. Yeah. So, okay, so when Caesar was going to march on Rome, because Rome was. Rome was still, you know, like, it was a republic and they had a Senate and they were in, like, dire straits.

And Caesar was like, going to go down there and try to fix it. And that was when Julius Caesar, that was when he went down there and there was a little, little stream or a little river called the Rubicon. And when they crossed the Rubicon, that was crossing. That was basically the, the, the border of what was considered Rome and the territory that was outside of the. Of. I mean, it may have been Roman Empire, but it wasn’t actually like, like, if you cross the border from Mexico into the United States, that would be American territory.

So it’d be like, say, crossing the Rio Grande. Right. Well, so when you cross the Rubicon, that’s. He basically. There was no turning back. That’s it. He had the. There’s no turning back. So that’s what, that’s what that, that euphemism is about. It’s about when you cross Rubicon, you are. It’s, it’s done. It’s. It’s. You. You can’t go. You cannot turn around. That’s right. And so much what of Roman history is military history. And so many of the adages and so forth that come from that time are military in nature. Yeah, that. It was too late.

I mean. Yeah, it was too late. And peace with trade as opposed to war without it. I mean, seems Like a pretty obvious choice. Well, it seems like an obvious choice for people like us because, you know, we value. What we value is peace. We want, we want peace, we want prosperity. We want to be able to live our lives, earn a good living, you know, raise families, things of that nature. What the elite wants is they want us constantly fighting amongst each other because for them, they profit a whole lot more off of war materials than they do off of, you know, trying to make, trying to make money, you know, honestly and legitimately.

So we’re so much easier to control that way, and they want to control us. And he even talks about Britain wanting to sew discord in the colonies for that reason. Yeah, absolutely. Yeah. So it’s like, you know, I mean, this, this is just, it’s, it’s indicative of the timeless piece that is common sense. It’s just, it gives you. Gives me chills. It really does. It transcends. It transcends generations. So, yeah, it’s applicable now. And it’s also thrilling to hear him talk about how this has never, ever, ever happened before. It’s never happened before where there wasn’t a king who came first and made all the laws and told everyone what to do and had his.

You know, it’s never happened before that a. People just came together and were like, well, okay, so how should we do this? Right? They established, they established a government. And then, and then the governmental, the, the, the people who ran the government came after the government, after the formation of the government. Yeah. Whereas before it was always the king who. That came in and he says, okay, we’re going to form a government and this is how it’s going to be. Yeah. So, yeah, yeah. And, yeah, yeah, it’s pretty amazing. I mean, to. Sorry, have that. Can you see him? He’s like, he’s, he’s sort of, he’s very, he’s very happy.

He’s making, he’s. He’s making biscuits onto my neck. And, and, and his claws are extremely sharp, so. But this is my boy. I love him. Anyway, sorry, not to mention, not to get too distracted, but. Yeah, but, but going, getting back to common sense, it’s, you know, it’s interesting how he talked about, like, this is the, this is the first time. And, you know, I know you said you didn’t like, you had to, like, plug your nose as you watched John Adams, but, you know, that speech, that John Adams. Oh, you mean because I don’t care for that actor.

Yeah, yeah, because you don’t care. I just don’t care about that actor. But. Yeah, whatever. But, but the, the, when he, when he gave up and he gave that speech at episode two, and he said, gentlemen, we are in the very midst of revolution. How few of the human race have an opportunity, have had, have had an opportunity to choose a system of government for themselves and their, and their children. You know, and, and it’s true. I mean, you know, I mean, that’s, and I, in certain respects I feel as though, you know, did you, did you see the thing where Musk or they started selling those, those Trump shirts? 20, 28.

Something about a hat or something. 28. Yeah. Right. So he was selling shirts. This is Trump 2028. Rewrite the rules. Oh, God. And, and there’s, you know, there’s, I feel like that, is that, that we potentially could be coming into a time where we amend the Constitution to be more in line with the values that we have today. Because if you look at the, you know, the, one of the, one of the main things that I say is wrong with the Constitution, and it’s not that there’s anything with the Constitution, but one of the main things that’s wrong with the Constitution is, is that it’s written in language that was designed for men in the late 1800s or in the late 1700s and early 1800s.

And we don’t use that same style of writing anymore. And so what they do is like, so for example, I’ll just use the general welcome. The general welfare clause. Okay, well, the general welfare clause in the Constitution was not about providing government assistance to people. Yeah, right. That’s not what, that’s not what they meant by welfare. What they meant by the general welfare was the general well being of the country. And, but, but you have modern day people who will take that and they’ll say, oh, well, they have with the general lover clause. That’s what you know.

And then the second Amendment, they talk about, oh, well, this is designed for a militia and you’re not a militia. You know, it’s, it’s. So what they do is they twist and they turn the words around and instead of trying to understand exactly what was written to the men of the day, which is what, you know, in, in the hermeneutical principles is called audience relevance. Instead of understanding what they meant and you know, to the audience that it was written to, you know, we, there’s, there’s a lot of things that are lost in translation. And I, you know, oftentimes I use the, the term kick the bucket.

Right? Well, we say kick the Bucket today, you know, or, you know, 10, 15, 20 years, kick the bucket meant, you know, hey, that means it’s, you know, you’ve, you know, you’ve. You’ve passed on, right? Well, I don’t know when that term came into being, but I guarantee you they didn’t say that 200 years ago. So. And there’s a very likely. There’s a strong possibility that they’re not going to say that 200 years from now. So if somebody read a letter and it says something about kick the bucket and somebody looks at it, they’re going to be like, what do they mean by kick the bucket? Huh? So it’s, you know, and I’m not saying that he.

That in the. That when they wrote the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, that they used phrases that would be only applicable to their generation, but they certainly wrote in a style that their generation would have understood. And, you know, and, you know, and I think they did their very best to write it in such a way, you know, taking into consideration the Second Amendment, you know, how could they have foreseen that, you know, 200 years from the time that they wrote that, that you’d have fighter planes with machine guns and cannons? You know what I mean? And, oh, I think they had vision.

I think they had plenty of vision. I think things extend through time more than I understand. I get what you’re saying, but what I’m saying is, is that when they talked about. They just said arms. Well, arms. All arms. That’s anything and everything, right? It could. It could be a sword. It could be matter. Yeah, yeah. 100. Right, exactly. So, but anyway, the, the point of the matter is, is that the language has been. Has been twisted around by people who want to twist our form of government. But, but again, when you read, when you read this.

Not that hard to. It’s not that hard to put two and two together. No, it’s not that outmoded. And by the way, kick the bucket, I always assumed that meant when someone was being hanged, the bucket being kicked out from under them. And that that was a very ancient or at least very old. Old. I don’t know about ancient, maybe. Ancient term, really. I never, you know what? I never really thought where it came. I’ve never thought about where that came from. I always assumed that’s what it was. The kick it bucket was kicked out from.

From, you know, like. But I can check it now. You’re gonna. Now you’re gonna make me. Now you’re gonna make me like a. Go. Go. And look, yeah, I’m not gonna do it right at this moment, but yeah, I’m gonna do it. First known written use of it was in a play, 1735. There are some theories about it. Yeah. Oh, people who hang themselves might have stood on a bucket then kicked it away. I, you know, I don’t know. Sounds to me like a hanging one way or the other. I. But well that makes, that just, that just makes sense.

So that makes perfect sense. Yeah. So. Well, we are. This, this concludes the reading of, of the, of common sense. Now for the next, for the next four weeks, Doug, the Constitution class is going to be out of town. And so as a, as a stand in, what we’re going to do is Carrington and myself are going. Well, she’s going to be doing most of the heavy lifting, but I’ll be here with her. We’re going to go through, we’re going to go through some of the Federalist and Anti Federalist papers that we kind of have a little bit of an outline done of what we want to do, what we want to cover over a four week span.

We may have a fifth week just as a fallback in the event that something happens at Doug and he can’t get back on time. But for the most part that is on, on this, starting this Tuesday at normal time which was beginning 3:30 Pacific, 6:30 Eastern, 5:30 Central. That would be. So we’re, we’re gonna, we’re gonna begin to go through, you know, some of those documents and see how they, you know, essentially the, the Federalist and Anti Federalist papers were what was written to give in depth explanation as to why they, they wrote the Constitution. I don’t know if you can see what he’s doing.

I can’t really. But it sounds like you’re enjoying it. Well, no, I’m not really. It’s his claws or his claws are sharp. So. But he, I don’t get. He, he goes outside a lot and I try to, I try to keep him in but he’s, he, he, man, he escapes and, but he’s got, he’s got like some ear mites and stuff and so I’m trying to keep him in so that I can, I can take care of that problem. But he, he’ll go outside and he’ll eat. I won’t see him for like two or three days because he just, he wants to be an outdoor cat.

You know, dependence. He is, he is an alpha and very strongly independent. Yeah, absolutely. And he’s fast. So I have to. I have to be very careful when I open up a door, I’ve to make sure that he’s not close by because he will sprint out. He is, he is exceedingly quick. I don’t, not, not that I want to get really in depth on, you know, in terms of cats, but I saw a thing that talked about how a snake, a snake can strike and.04 seconds. So like 0.040, like 4/10, 4/10 of a second is how long it takes for a snake to strike.

Yeah, yeah. Less than that. Yeah. 407. Yeah. So, but this is the thing. A cat, A cat’s reflexes are so fast that they can see that attack coming and, and within that time span, they can see the attack coming, defend it and counter attack. Wow. Yeah. Yeah, that’s fast. Yeah, very fast. That’s why my, that’s why my hands are good. That’s why my hands get to be scratched up and bloody because I like to play with them. So. But anyway, guys, enough about my kitty cats and we will look forward to seeing you this Tuesday. Right.

We’ll try to pick some things in the papers that are especially relevant to what’s going on now. Right? Yes. And that doesn’t mean that we can’t pick up and, and talk about a few other, a few other things as well. Absolutely. That’ll happen naturally. Thousand percent. Yeah. It’s just going to be a natural, natural discussion based on the things that are occurring in our, in our, in our world right now. So. Yeah. So. All right, guys. Well, hey, I appreciate, appreciate you tuning in on this Sunday afternoon. Really hope you got something out of the, you know, the, the common sense document.

And thank you, care for reading that. You did an excellent job. And yeah, let us know if anything struck anyone in particular or you were inspired by. Absolutely. We love to hear. Absolutely. 100%. All right, guys, well, on with that note. We look forward to seeing you this coming Tuesday. And care, stick around. I’m gonna, I’m gonna go ahead and end the live stream and guys, we’ll see you. We’ll see you a little bit. We’ll see that next week.
[tr:tra].