Chesterton made fairly clear what kind of views and feelings he regarded as characteristic of the common man. There was, for example, attachment to the idea of the monogamous family, including distinct roles for men and women and opposition to contraception and similar unnatural practices. There was the desire for small-scale property within which a man could be his own master; the passion for noisy and gregarious celebrations; patriotism; the love of mystery and adventure; wonder at the sheer miracle of existence and a strain of natural piety.
...If he were writing about the family now, he would either have to modify his assumption that the “common man” is the repository of what Chesterton considered “common sense”, or else he would have to follow the Marxists and blame the wrong views of “the people” on “false consciousness”, no doubt induced by the kind of popular education that he attacked.
Margaret Canovan, Chesterton and the People, The Chesterton Review February 1984
More than two decades since Maragaret Canovan wrote this, the difference between Chesterton's view of the common man and the really existing common man seems even bigger. It might be the biggest flaw in Chesterton's whole philosophy. Many of the views and practices he viewed as the preserve of elites and intellectuals have now been embraced by the common people-- contraception being an obvious example.
(Incidentally, I am going to America for three weeks, and planning to spend as little of that time as possible at a computer, so there will be no posting for a while.)