Comment by ch4s3
4 days ago
I think you can more readily and correctly connect the American distrust of institutions first to the treatment of the colonists by the British Empire, and later to immigration of people fleeing authoritarian countries. One also cannot dismiss the distrust in authority among put upon minorities. The British Empire was no less brutal in its American colonies than in other places.
The Puritans were always few in number and were demographically displaced by later immigration around the fishing industry in New England.
Displaced in terms of total population, but the aristocracy of the US was mostly Mayflower types will into the 20th Century.
I think some overstate the influence of Radical Protestants on American ideology with offhand references to Max Weber or by calling whatever their pet cause is a fight against "secular puritanism." On the other hand, I do think there are some interesting parallels.
For example, one could argue that the mistreatment of colonists by the mother country was overstated by a population already distrustful of the Crown. I'm no expert, but it would be interesting to read more about that dynamic.
I don't disagree, but the descendants of the Puritans stopped being Puritans pretty quickly. The Halfway Covenant was only about 40 years after they landed in Plymouth and there were virtually no Puritans by 1740.
"Pretty quickly" may be an exaggeration there, given that 1740 was a good five generations after the founding of the Plymouth colony, and they were still famously conducting witch trials only fifty years earlier.
But it surely did happen -- IIRC, Adams and Jefferson were both noting in their correspondence how by the end of the 18th century most of the Puritan descendants had somehow become Unitarians.
1 reply →
IANAH but I'm not sure one can really separate "treatment of the colonists by the British Empire" from the struggle between Dissenters and the Established Church. Yes, Puritans were relatively few in number but they were influential. Later colonists would have had to fit themselves into the society created by the Puritans, if nothing else by constituting their own power base in opposition to the Puritan one. They are still part of our foundational myth and buckle-shoe-wearing caricatures of them /still/ go up all over the country every single November.
> Yes, Puritans were relatively few in number but they were influential
They were influential in a narrow geography of the Massachusetts Bay Colony for about 50 years. Their own children and grandchildren largely rejected Puritanism resulting in the Half-Way Covenant and the eventual demise of Puritanism. I agree that they're part of the foundational myth, but it's just that myth.