Paine shifted Locke’s natural rights theory toward popular retention of rights.

Evidence

In Common Sense, however, Paine rejects this conventional way of framing patriot pleas for liberty and, without seeking, demanding, or even mentioning the rights of British subjects, begins with a genesis story about society and government that provides a broad foundation for freedom. … Men originally were created free and equal in nature, Locke theorized, but in society, they later sacrificed some of their natural freedom and equality to form governments for better protecting their life, liberty, and property. “The liberty of man, in society, is to be under no other legislative power, but that established, by consent,” Locke writes. “Freedom of men under government is, to have a standing rule to live by, common to every one of that society, and made by the legislative power erected in it.” For Locke and Paine, the rights of man (and both authors always use the male gender in such cases) originated with the created natural order, but for Paine more than Locke, those natural rights remained with mankind, while for Locke more than Paine, they shifted by consent to representative government. — Edward J. Larson, Declaring Independence, 51

Categorization

• DEFINE: Clarifies the contested meaning of natural rights — whether retained by the people or delegated to government by consent — central to foundational-values analysis.
• XREF: The Locke-versus-Paine divergence over whether rights remain with the people prefigures modern conflicts over originalism versus living constitutionalism and popular sovereignty. — connects to: Paine grounded American rights in natural society, not British subjecthood. — Edward J. Larson, Declaring Independence, 49

Broader Connections

• Paine grounded American rights in natural society, not British subjecthood. #expands (0.85) — Edward J. Larson, Declaring Independence, 49