• Admiral Patrick@dubvee.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        45
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        I’ve been watching a lot of QI lately, and that was a topic in a recent episode I watched. You basically got it exactly.

        The whole ‘pilgrims escaping religious persecution’ story is an absolute myth. The puritans basically wanted to be able to persecute others for not following their beliefs - they were the persecutors. It’s wild (and similar to what we’re seeing today).

        So, the wannabe theocrats we have today are correct about the pilgrims wanting a theocracy (in 1620), but the people who we consider the Founding Fathers didn’t actually found the country until 157 years later.

        That’s a big gap of time they’re overlooking / disregarding.

        Maybe we should just set them adrift like England did and hope for the best.

          • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            Well, more broadly, the age of imperial colonialism was bad for pretty much every civilization said empires came into contact with. The Spanish and Portuguese were doing heinous shit for centuries. Later, the Dutch, French, Belgians, Germans, Brits, the US (don’t forget the Native American genocide and the Monroe Doctrine, amongst other things), and others got in on the action (Japan is in this club too, largely taking their inspiration from the Portuguese and the Brits, but for mostly contextual reasons of “they seriously pissed off two much bigger empires right as they were getting into the positive economic feedback loop” - aka the Pacific Theater of WW2 - had their imperial colonial era substantially truncated).

            More pointedly: empires existed before the age of European colonialism, but what with the advent of the age of sail, the Europeans unfortunately went down a road that was on average (arguably) far more nakedly exploitative and obviously unsustainable in the long run than any empire in history (excepting the Mongol empire, of course, which was more or less just Genghis doing a huge zerg rush with early-game cavalry and mounted archery units).

            TL;DR: any reasonably-stable country in Europe (plus the US) with enough scratch to put together a halfway decent navy was getting in on the action for literal centuries.

    • frezik@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Yes, no, it’s complicated. If you wanted to cherry pick data for either direction, you can do it. It’s more accurate to say there was a wide mix of ideologies.

      Maybe we shouldn’t be so beholden to the opinions of people from 200+ years ago.

    • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      I still don’t get why this is so important to people. Yes there was a religious cult that came to what is now the US. Ok? It’s a cute historical event but it doesn’t add up to a whole lot.

    • Son_of_dad@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      6 months ago

      Yes, to the founding fathers, the monarchy was an entity like god. It was there but did nothing, helped them in no way and only took from them. They were all born into this colony where people were expected to serve a faceless king across the ocean.