9 ms·

Right, that's what I'd lean to as well. But was the reason they left the legal tradition? In this telling of the story, they were fully aware of the legal trad

by arjie 4mo ago

Right, that's what I'd lean to as well. But was the reason they left the legal tradition? In this telling of the story, they were fully aware of the legal tradition being the reason for their unhappiness. But is it true? I know the original immigrants/colonists were looking for a specific kind of religious freedom they couldn't have, but you must be speaking of the later waves (which are the majority of people). I remember ages ago reading this paper (PDF warning): https://annesofiebeckknudsen.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/thosewhostayed.pdf https://annesofiebeckknudsen.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/... It made the case that (simplifying) individualists left for the US while collectivists stayed. And because of the massive scale of the migration relative to the populations, this meant that the two regions were permanently altered. Cool, eh? But I don't know if the thesis has been supported by alternative tests. Essentially, it's what I feel is true, but I've felt many things are true and been wrong many times!

BigTTYGothGF 4mo ago
> original immigrants/colonists were looking for a specific kind of religious freedom they couldn't have The ones who landed at Plymouth Rock were, sort of, but I'm not sure how representative they were of the time.
Joker_vD 4mo ago
The original immigrants/colonists were Puritans and their approach to the governing and liberties, well, it can be arguably called proto-totalitarian. Remember, those were the same kind of people that managed, of all things, to push the Parliament to prohibit celebrations of Christmas and Easter during the English Interregnum, despite massive popular backlash. The Puritans in the American colonies had roughly the same attitude: Christmas observance was outlawed in Boston in 1659, with a fine of five shillings. The ban by the Puritans was revoked in 1681 by an English appointed governor, Edmund Andros; however, it was not until the mid-19th century that celebrating Christmas became fashionable in the Boston region. Before the Declaration of Independence in 1776, it was not widely celebrated in the American Colonies. There is much written about the Puritans in the North America; their ideas, sadly, influenced the American political thinking and culture a lot.

by arjie 4mo ago

BigTTYGothGF 4mo ago

> original immigrants/colonists were looking for a specific kind of religious freedom they couldn't have The ones who landed at Plymouth Rock were, sort of, but I'm not sure how representative they were of the time.

Joker_vD 4mo ago

The original immigrants/colonists were Puritans and their approach to the governing and liberties, well, it can be arguably called proto-totalitarian. Remember, those were the same kind of people that managed, of all things, to push the Parliament to prohibit celebrations of Christmas and Easter during the English Interregnum, despite massive popular backlash. The Puritans in the American colonies had roughly the same attitude: Christmas observance was outlawed in Boston in 1659, with a fine of five shillings. The ban by the Puritans was revoked in 1681 by an English appointed governor, Edmund Andros; however, it was not until the mid-19th century that celebrating Christmas became fashionable in the Boston region. Before the Declaration of Independence in 1776, it was not widely celebrated in the American Colonies. There is much written about the Puritans in the North America; their ideas, sadly, influenced the American political thinking and culture a lot.