The Loss of Common Sense in Modern American Culture

THE LOSS

OF

COMMON SENSE

IN

MODERN

AMERICAN

CULTURE

TOM S. PANE

THE LOSS OF COMMON SENSE IN MODERN AMERICAN

CULTURE

Copyright © 2024 by Tom S. Pane

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means without written permission from the author.

The worn flag photo on the front cover of this book is a replica of the Betsy Ross flag, which can be seen at the Betsy Ross House in Philadelphia PA

ISBN: 979-8-89409-532-5

Contact: https://thelossofcommonsense.info

Table Of Contents

Preface

Chapter 1    Early American Idealism, Government Growth

Chapter 2    Easter Surprise! Who Is This Author?                        

Chapter 3    Changing Paths: Dashing Through Life

Chapter 4    Behavioral Addictions: Our Best Friends

Chapter 5    Religion And Politics: Do They Fit Together?​

Chapter 6    Capitalism, Politicians, And Corporations

Chapter 7    Education For Life: Then And Now

Chapter 8    Happiness And The Magic Mirror​

Chapter 9    Introspection Or Us Versus Them

Chapter 10   Recent Past Presidents

Chapter 11   Summary And Analysis: Is This The End?

Epilogue                                                                                                

Bibliography                                                                              

Notes  

Preface

This is not a book that many American citizens, politicians, or corporations might like. It is not politically correct and what is written might be opposed by both far-right conservative Republicans and far-left liberal Democrats. With the way today’s political and social opinions have become so extreme, this book may be hated to such an extent that people might be willing to seek me out, threaten me, or do me harm. We are living in extreme tribal times where some people believe that anyone who is not like them is an evil or bad person. I do not want to be another victim of negative social threats, so I am using a pseudonym.

Some of this book was written before the COVID-19 pandemic. The way this virus spread and the severe consequences and deaths it created occurred because many people have disregarded the long-term significance of maintaining a healthy body and the compromising dialog that is necessary for social stability.

When I first started writing this book, I looked around the world and wondered: Why are there countries on Earth where the general populations are both healthier and happier? Does it occur because their leaders provide the citizens with health and economic benefits not found in the United States? Or is it that many of our citizens no longer believe or want to follow the Era of Enlightenment philosophies and social norms that guided Our Founding Fathers when they created the country?

When people choose hyperbolic, technological-based philosophies and ideals as their new normality, many Americans become so mesmerized and demanding to satisfy their wanting behaviors that they seem to lose sight of what these new ideologies may be doing to their overall mental outlook. Common sense and rationale become lost practices when believing, desiring, and acting out what the addictive media and Internet prescribes become a new biblical norm for defining the culture. Life becomes a rocket ship ride of data, colors, and unlimited choices where everyone is trying to outdo everyone else. But where are these self-induced overdoses of technology, data, and extremism taking us?

Chapter 1

EARLY AMERICAN IDEALISM, GOVERNMENT GROWTH

In January of 1776, Thomas Paine published a pamphlet called Common Sense. Paine was one of the most-read writers of the 18th century. Decades before numerous human rights laws were enacted in our country, Paine advocated and supported antislavery, animal rights, women’s rights, and free public education. A major aspect of this Common Sense pamphlet talked about why the common people in the American colonies should challenge and seek independence from the English Monarchy. Paine focused on why the separation from England should occur, and his pamphlet was one of the major factors influencing the colonists to fight in the American Revolution.

Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines common sense as sound and prudent judgment based on a simple perception of the situation or facts. Some words that are synonyms of common sense are discreetness, discretion, level-headedness, prudence, sensibleness, and wisdom.  Common sense, judgment, and wisdom mean the ability to reach intelligent conclusions. Sense implies a reliable ability to judge and decide with soundness, prudence, and intelligence. Common sense suggests an average degree of such ability without sophistication or special knowledge.  Common sense tells me it is wrong or right. Judgment implies a sense of temperament, refined by experience, training, and maturity. These are all Merriam-Webster denoted interpretations.[1]

Many of the above ways of defining common sense do not seem common or sensible in both today’s social and governmental functioning abilities. The origin of the words common sense may have started in the aftermath of England’s Glorious Revolution. The concept then moved to the French Era of Enlightenment and finally to the Age of Revolution in the American colonies with Thomas Paine.

In the 14th Century, common sense was originally the power of uniting the impressions conveyed by the five physical senses, thus, ordinary understanding, without being foolish or insane. (Latin "sensus communis, Greek aisthesis, meaning good sense," is from 1726.)[2]

To me, in present day psychology, there are two types of common sense.

1)      Historical Common Sense. In determining one’s choices, the perceptions and analyses of one’s options by using reason, wisdom, and rationale to figure out what is most appropriate for a given situation. This method has hardly changed throughout many generations of history going back to the Ancient Greeks or further.

2)      Common Sense based on the current social variability of the times. Perceptions and choices are based on and influenced by the latest social activities, fads, peer pressures, and trends in music, movies, television, advertising, fashion, etc., that do not use reason or rationale to be accepted or understood within one’s life experiences. I call these the here today, gone tomorrow approaches toward today’s common-sense perception and usage.

The strangest thing about historical Common Sense is that in much of today’s American culture, historical Common Sense is hardly common. If you were to say that a sense of extremism is common, or a sense of tribalism is common, or a sense of greed is common, I would say you are closer to describing American culture today.

A major aspect of historical Common Sense in America was defined by how people lived and developed their daily life and their value systems based on positive religious morals and ethics. You can be both religious and spiritual without belonging to a specific organized religion.

Let us look at one of the greatest and most durable generations in American history. These were the generations born between 1890 and 1930. This was the generation of both my parents and grandparents. In many ways, life was a struggle for many people who were born during this time frame. A lot of people came from the farms to the big cities, or they came to America from other countries. They then had to learn how to adapt to big city life and the cultures of a new country.

Decisions leading up to Prohibition, World War I, the Roaring 20’s, and the start of the Great Depression were developed, decided, and administered by people born before 1880. President William Taft was born in 1857, President Woodrow Wilson was born in 1856, President Warren Harding in 1865, President Calvin Coolidge in 1872, and President Herbert Hoover in 1874. These gentlemen were Presidents of the United States between 1908 and 1933. 

As an example, General John Pershing, who was Commander of the American Expeditionary Force on the Western Front of Europe during World War I, was born in 1860. These men were not the greatest innovative or rational leaders this country has seen. There were many formative and challenging events that took place while they were President or leading our military. Most of these leaders either did not do enough to solve our country’s problems or did too much, which created more problems.

It was not until the early 1930s, when Franklin Roosevelt became President in the early days of the Depression and led us through most of World War II, that the strengths of those in the Greatest Generation blossomed. This Generation saw the necessity to pick themselves up after the sorrows and losses of the Depression and a worldwide war with tens of millions of soldiers and civilians killed. They were named the Greatest Generation because of how their leadership decisions were based on using positive ethical and moral foundations to guide the country.

Back in the 1930s, great numbers of people fell into poverty, which was displayed to the world by their skinny bodies and worn faces that often looked ten to twenty years older than their actual age. Medicaid and Medicare were not available and Social Security had just started giving people insufficiently small amounts of money to live on. Fast forward to the 2005-9 financial recession or the Covid-19 pandemic. A poor person could now have healthcare coverage, receive welfare checks and food stamps, own smart phones, computers, flat-screen TVs, and maybe even a vehicle to drive. Large numbers are overweight or obese.  America may have some of the fattest people living in poverty in the world.

What happens to deciphering the rationality of Common Sense when it goes from one’s outlook being based on positive morals and ethics, the historical norms, to one’s outlook based on what is awesome and trendy?

Just because events around you are common does not make them an aspect of Common Sense. Here is a more current example of what I mean. Your current cell phone is a couple of years old but still works fine. Maybe you do not want to feel left out, so you go out and buy one of those newer, expensive smartphones, though this purchase might not be what is currently best for your family budget.  But all your friends have one of these phones, and you do not want to feel left out for not having the latest technology. You put the charged amount on your 15-30% credit card and bring it home. You may have thought this was an overall, common-sense approach until you got home. Your purchase may upset your wife, who now either wants one of these newer smartphones for herself or realizes your purchase is way outside the family budget, and with the added interest you would be paying a lot more for the device. Your children may be irate that they are not allowed to have a phone like yours to communicate with all their friends. Maybe you realize that what others call Common Sense approaches with their purchases may not be the right kind of Common Sense for you and the family.

How about we expand this example to a bigger question? Maybe there is a leader in power whose governmental decisions produce lower unemployment numbers; it may get you a small raise in income or make your stock investments increase in value. This leader speaks of how powerful the country has become under his leadership, and he promises to keep the country the strongest in the world, both economically and militarily. Maybe you question some of the leader’s tactics, biases, and negative language toward minorities, people of other races, or those in different political parties because of your own religious beliefs or the family ethics of how you were raised by your parents.

But do you use your new Internet-inspired Common Sense to rationalize that by supporting this leader, you might soon be able to buy more stuff for yourself, spend more on the kids, take your wife out to fancier restaurants, or get new electronic gadgets for everyone in the household? Was the ability to acquire more stuff a primary reason why our Founding Fathers chose to create and develop our new country? The true and historical meaning of Common Sense used by our Founding Fathers was advocated to create more equality and harmony in how people related to each other. Buying more stuff does not produce greater equality for everyone.

In the 1920s and 1930s, both Hitler and Mussolini initially presented their people with promises of superior military power, greater and richer employment opportunities, putting more food on their dinner tables, the ability to buy more stuff for themselves, better public services, and transportation facilities. The people in each country used their go along with the crowd common sense to dismiss their leader’s discriminatory tactics against minorities, their preaching against those other evil political parties, and their downgrading and imprisonment of other ethnic races.

In Italy, eventually, Fascism became not only acceptable to the public but a desired way for the leader to govern. In Germany, the people eventually favored the Nazi propaganda approach of a totalitarian state. In both countries, the people’s common-sense approaches falsely rationalized that antisemitism and anti-parliamentarism were acceptable behaviors. The form and usage of their common-sense approach allowed them to believe that the white Aryan race and nationalism were necessary for military strength and greater financial security, thereby giving them the opportunity to do and buy more. Hitler created Fuhrerprinzip, the leader principle, where subordinates were committed to absolute obedience to the leader. Hitler also held that both the party structure and the branches of the government were subservient to the leader at the top.[3]

There are some politicians in America running for office who believe that, if elected, they would have the authority to replace any current short-or-long-term governmental worker who does not fully believe in the ideologies of that ruler and replace them with people who only believe in the ideologies of the candidate who won the election. This political desire comes from the same so-called common-sense approach followed by the citizens of Germany and Italy in the 1930s.

History shows us that this pattern of manipulation of mass populations repeats itself around the globe every so many decades. Because generations die and newer generations become more removed from negative past experiences, they lose interest in their city, state, or country’s history and what it can teach them about the present.

Fascism and Nationalism are not governmental ruling philosophies that just suddenly occur within any nation. They usually start out as lite versions that involve subjecting the populace to a lot of subtle brainwashing propaganda from a leader or organization over time. They could start with police or troops arresting protesters who may be demonstrating against government inaction or injustices. A leader might call the protestors terrorists, and then repeat the claim that they are trying to destroy the government that only he is trying to keep together. He will insist that physical force might have to be used to save and stabilize the government. It is only his methods of law and order that must prevail. He instills fear in the public that these evil radicals must be removed or locked up so that good citizens will be safe and not have their homes and businesses robbed or burned to the ground.

Then there is the propaganda that these so-called troublemakers want to create a socialist government that would destroy the great economy that he will create or that he has already created. Shifting the blame on why these current evil situations are occurring is a prime tool for a leader to use to convince the citizens that the only solution to all their problems is that he should be the country’s leader. Of course, many of the problems may have occurred under his previous leadership, but he disregards that responsibility, blaming it on local radicals and leftist propaganda. If you want to learn more about how Fascism and Nationalism developed in Europe and around the world during the 1920s and 1930s, watch the British Documentary called Impossible Peace – the Time Between World Wars on Acorn TV or Acorn streaming through Amazon.

FOUNDING FATHERS GOVERNMENT

Our Founding Fathers set up our government differently than other countries in the world. The Founders had no idea what the daily lifestyle activities or customs of future generations might be. Their efforts were in constructing a form of government that might treat the citizens differently than the old monarchs, dictators, or aristocratic governments seen around the world. From the very beginning, our leaders would sit down together, whatever their backgrounds were, and discuss, in an open exchange of ideas, the suggestions that the various colonial representatives brought to the meetings from the citizens in their districts. There were no political parties, just educated patriots who saw the importance of starting a new country, a country that could be developed for the benefit of everyone.

There were not hundreds or thousands of lobbyists influencing our leaders with large campaign contributions for their constant reelections.  These early representatives intended to serve our country in governmental leadership jobs for short periods of time, not to become permanent or long-serving political dynasties. Most of our Founding Fathers’ philosophical governing ideas, which they incorporated into the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution of the United States, and the Bill of Rights, came from both the philosophies of the Eras of French Enlightenment and the Scottish Enlightenment that were taking hold in Europe.

The Age of Enlightenment was a late 17th and early 18th-century intellectual movement emphasizing reason, individualism, and skepticism. It also incorporated the then-modern idea of progress through reason and science. The Enlightenment philosophies became the basis of the American Revolution. From these French and English philosophers came the following ideas:

John Locke    

-Governmental power from the consent of the people

- Creating a representative government

- Establishing the limits of governmental powers

Charles Montesquieu

-The importance of separation of powers

-The Federal system of governing

-The three branches of government

-The system of checks and balances

Jean Jacques Rousseau

-Direct democracy

Voltaire

- Free Speech, religious tolerance

American thinkers of the 1700s, including Thomas Paine, James Madison, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, and Benjamin Franklin, heavily emphasized Scottish philosophical thinking in helping to create a new form of governing. They accepted not only the anti-authoritarian doctrine of liberalism, but also spoke of the importance of being virtuous, enlightened, and community-focused, which they called Republican Thinking. There was a lot of skepticism about the American Enlightenment, with people remembering Plato’s belief that democracy led to tyranny, and Aristotle’s belief that democracy was the best of the worst forms of government.  Who were the teachers of some of Our Original Founders? At 16 years old, Thomas Jefferson attended William and Mary College, where he was mentored by William Small, a highly respected member of the Scottish Enlightenment and a leading educator at the school.

James Madison, who attended Princeton in 1769, was mentored by John Witherspoon, who was part of a group of educators from Scotland that brought the ideas of the Scottish Enlightenment to the Colonies.

Alexander Hamilton attended Kings College, today’s Columbia, where he was tutored by Robert Harpur, who came from Glasgow, Scotland. Many of Our Founders were well-versed and educated in understanding Aristotle, Cicero, and the Bible, often reading these manuscripts in their original languages. To show you the significance of the Scot John Witherspoon, he mentored 28 U.S. Senators, 49 U.S. Representatives, 3 Supreme Court Justices, and 12 governors while teaching in our country.

Benjamin Franklin, going back to his day of the Poor Richard’s Almanac, held that to live a useful and dignified life, a person should exhibit the virtues of temperance, silence, order, resolution, frugality, industry, sincerity, justice, moderation, cleanliness, tranquility, and humility. These were the principles he believed made a good citizen. Today, Americans are reminded that temperance, frugality, moderation, tranquility, and humility might be anti-capitalistic and bad for the economy. Today we might be told to be enthusiastic, constantly excited, big spenders, debtors, braggers, and social climbers to be successful and get ahead.

Do most of today’s Americans know what philosophies and beliefs some of Our Founding Fathers valued? How about the words in the publication Federalist #10, used by James Madison on November 23, 1787?

A zeal for different opinions concerning religion, concerning government, and many other points, as well of speculation as a practice; an attachment to different leaders ambitiously contending for preeminence and power; or to persons of other description whose fortunes have been interesting to the human passions, have, in turn, divided mankind into parties, inflaming them with mutual animosity, and rendered them much more disposed to vex and oppress each other than to cooperate for their common good….But the most common and durable source of factions has been the various and unequal distribution of property. Those who hold and those who are without property have ever formed distinct interests in society. Those who are creditors, and those who are debtors, fall under a like discrimination…It is in vain to say that enlightened statesmen will be able to adjust these clashing interests and render them all subservient to the public good.  Enlightened statesmen will not always be at the helm.[4] In this publication, Madison also said: No man is allowed to be a judge in his own cause because his interest would certainly bias his judgment. After serving two terms as President, George Washington said this during his Farewell Address in 1796: "One of the expedients of (a) party to acquire influence within particular districts is to misrepresent the opinions and aims of other districts. You cannot shield yourselves too