11 Comments
User's avatar
LudwigF's avatar

Great article - thanks for sharing it!

HBI's avatar
4hEdited

The colonial elite was well-red, but after reading that I was well-blue. :-)

It's interesting that not a single tertiary history book taught in American schools (that I have ever seen, and I have seen many) ever questions the founding myth. The "no taxation without representation" might be mentioned, but it never mentions that the colonists themselves rejected the idea. The whole founding myth is bogus anyway, as I have pointed out in my comments about Washington.

I'm not sure the growth of North America would have followed the same path, were it under British control. It might look more like Australia.

David Roman's avatar

Yeah, it’s one of those things that would have so much impact on world history that it’s really hard to assess the long-term effects. It’s not like, well, would Romania be much more powerful if it had Moldavia? We all know the ramifications wouldn’t be Earth-shattering to the same extent.

Rock_M's avatar

One myth replaces another

Robert C Culwell's avatar

Outstanding!

Thank you.....

Laura Creighton's avatar

Why so down on Samuel Von Pufendorf (one 'f')?

David Roman's avatar

Matthew Yglesias is not that bad!

Mary Catelli's avatar

Massachusetts was founded with literally apocalyptic plans. Christ was returning to Earth to rule for a thousand years through his saints, and so they were getting the ball rolling. No one could vote without being a church member, and no one could become a church member without convincing the present membership that he had undergone a proper Calvinistic conversion, and was therefore a saint.

David Roman's avatar

Would you recommend any specific book on early Mass. history?

Mary Catelli's avatar

*A Reforming People: Puritanism and the Transformation of Public Life in New England* by David D. Hall. His *The Faithful Shepherd* is also good, concentrating on the ministers.