Yes! Somehow, European-descended colonizing not-Americans have never been able to shed the "fundamental" pattern of simultaneously claiming victimhood ("We fled persecution in Europe.") and aggressively pursuing oppression of whatever poor not-them dared to quibble. (I did not know specifically about the Quakers, so I learned something t…
Yes! Somehow, European-descended colonizing not-Americans have never been able to shed the "fundamental" pattern of simultaneously claiming victimhood ("We fled persecution in Europe.") and aggressively pursuing oppression of whatever poor not-them dared to quibble. (I did not know specifically about the Quakers, so I learned something today!) I have repeatedly beaten the drum that I think there is an actual chromosomal link to what has been termed "authoritarianism."( Is that more farfetched than the "Cohen gene?") The DNA predisposition would be concentrated, no matter how faintly, amongst the self-selected fanatics who emigrated to what they assumed (since they were god's chosen!) was a blank slate territory awaiting transformation into a latter-day Promised Land. So I would second your prognostication. Fortunately, genes are flighty, and I seem to have escaped heavy programming on one side. Why the subject has been of interest to me for a long time. On the "nurture" side, maybe big, big education came into play. Very understandable why the Puritans really hate education.
To be honest, I only recently learned about the persecution of the Quakers by the Puritans, but I've known about their beating of children for some time. However, Christians still beat their children, a practice I believe is the root of deep dysfunction in our society. It seems that the persecution of Quakers by the Puritans was primarily because Quakers believed an individual could have a direct relationship with God without going through a priest/pastor. Despite protestations of religious purity, the most logical reason is that this threatened the men who rigidly controlled the community. It was never about God or "righteousness" but then, as now, it was about power over others. In Europe, the Puritans were considered dangerous zealots. To my mind, that is exactly what they were (and still are.) Truly, they terrify me.
Oh, lordy. (To coin a phrase.) "Prime Directive" of medieval Church was, you only get love from Jesus if you pay us! I joke about, don't make me mad, I still hold a grudge about the Siege of Montsegur! Well, some "minds working alike" going on: just moved down to Farrar comment. Voila!
Yes! Somehow, European-descended colonizing not-Americans have never been able to shed the "fundamental" pattern of simultaneously claiming victimhood ("We fled persecution in Europe.") and aggressively pursuing oppression of whatever poor not-them dared to quibble. (I did not know specifically about the Quakers, so I learned something today!) I have repeatedly beaten the drum that I think there is an actual chromosomal link to what has been termed "authoritarianism."( Is that more farfetched than the "Cohen gene?") The DNA predisposition would be concentrated, no matter how faintly, amongst the self-selected fanatics who emigrated to what they assumed (since they were god's chosen!) was a blank slate territory awaiting transformation into a latter-day Promised Land. So I would second your prognostication. Fortunately, genes are flighty, and I seem to have escaped heavy programming on one side. Why the subject has been of interest to me for a long time. On the "nurture" side, maybe big, big education came into play. Very understandable why the Puritans really hate education.
To be honest, I only recently learned about the persecution of the Quakers by the Puritans, but I've known about their beating of children for some time. However, Christians still beat their children, a practice I believe is the root of deep dysfunction in our society. It seems that the persecution of Quakers by the Puritans was primarily because Quakers believed an individual could have a direct relationship with God without going through a priest/pastor. Despite protestations of religious purity, the most logical reason is that this threatened the men who rigidly controlled the community. It was never about God or "righteousness" but then, as now, it was about power over others. In Europe, the Puritans were considered dangerous zealots. To my mind, that is exactly what they were (and still are.) Truly, they terrify me.
Oh, lordy. (To coin a phrase.) "Prime Directive" of medieval Church was, you only get love from Jesus if you pay us! I joke about, don't make me mad, I still hold a grudge about the Siege of Montsegur! Well, some "minds working alike" going on: just moved down to Farrar comment. Voila!