Two visions of America

[Horse with no Name]

There are two visions of America. One precedes our founding fathers and finds its roots in the harshness of our puritan past. It is very suspicious of freedom, uncomfortable with diversity, hostile to science, unfriendly to reason, contemptuous of personal autonomy. It sees America as a religious nation. It views patriotism as allegiance to God. It secretly adores coercion and conformity. Despite our constitution, despite the legacy of the Enlightenment, it appeals to millions of Americans and threatens our freedom.

The other vision finds its roots in the spirit of our founding revolution and in the leaders of this nation who embraced the age of reason. It loves freedom, encourages diversity, embraces science and affirms the dignity and rights of every individual. It sees America as a moral nation, neither completely religious nor completely secular. It defines patriotism as love of country and of the people who make it strong. It defends all citizens against unjust coercion and irrational conformity.

This second vision is our vision. It is the vision of a free society. We must be bold enough to proclaim it and strong enough to defend it against all its enemies...Rabbi Sherwin Wine

[Poet Lariat]

1. I'll have some of the latter, please.

[tocqueville]

2. the second version is the version "lite" of the first one

- Define "moral"

- a society is either secular OR religious. There is nothing in between. Being secular is the only long-term guarantee for democracy.
The American ambiguity about this has led to today's situation.

- nothing in the second version refers to the needs of the people and how they can be secured by legislation. It puts the individual rights above the rights of the community, instead of looking to a fair balance.

- it emphasizes "freedom". Not a word is said about equity.

[Midnight Rambler]

11. Not necessarily

You're right in that it doesn't guarantee fairness for everyone. However, it certainly lays the groundwork for it. The Founders knew that over time, things would progress far beyond their own context, and left the door open for future generations to expand liberties. Not to mention the fact that they took religion out of the government, no matter what fundies think. Under the first system, not only is religion government itself, but the door is completely shut to any sort of reform.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

3. You know, England got the Puritans to leave

why can't WE?

[Gildor Inglorion]

5. I second the motion...Antarctica should suit them nicely

harsh, bleak landscape to match their vicious, unforgiving view of the world. On the other hand, what a rotten thing to do to all those nice penguins!

[TallahasseeGrannie]

8. Yes, I understand penguins sometimes have

altnerative lifestyles. That will never do.

[bullimiami]

4. there are 2 visions of the world.

the first is where elite rule and others serve.
the second is where we are all our brothers keepers.

religion is just a tool. used for good and evil.

[nuxvomica]

6. I think that's a little simplistic and probably unfair to the Puritans

There are two visions but I think the first traces it's history to the Loyalists and more directly to the plantation culture of the Antebellum South -- a belief in a two-tiered culture of master and servant that has transformed into the corporatism of today. The Patriots actually arose from the Puritan culture, which valued education and hard work as the paths to personal success more so than the continuation of a heirarchy based on birthright.

[nadinbrzezinski]

7. Yes and no

the latter rose from the Enlightenmetn culture of the North East, but Cotton Mather was far more for religious control than he was for freedom,

Though I agree with you in the sense taht the worst corporate citizen of all comes from the south (Walmart) which has a history of multiple violations... and they would be very comformtable in the old south.

[Greyhound]

12. Not to defend them, but I would point out that wally world was a much

better corporate citizen (notice they are still citizens while we are mere consumers) when Sam was alive. They paid comparable wages and buying American was paramount. It was after he died that the suits really took over and his deplorable offspring got into the till with both hands.

[pat_k]

10. Yes, Puritan roots much more complex -- posted below

My post below should probably have been posted as a response to this one.

[pat_k]

9. Puritan Harshness -- and Equity, Democracy, Soveriegnty of the People

Our Puritan roots are complex. Harshness and adherence to holy writ (as they interpreted it), certainly, but Equity, Democracy and Sovereignty of the people too.

Consider these excerpts from de Tocquerville's "Democracy in America" (1835).

Puritanism was not merely a religious doctrine, but is corresponded in many points with the most absolute democratic and republican theories. It was this tendency which had aroused it's most dangerous adversaries...

No sooner had the emigrants landed on the barren coast described by Nathaniel Morton than it was their first care to constitute a society, by passing the following act:

In the name of God, Amen. We whose names are underwritten...Do by these presents solemnly and mutually in the presence of God and one another, covenant and combine ourselves into a civil body politick, for our better ordering and preservation, and furtherance of the ends aforesaid: and by virtue hereof do enact, constitute and frame such just and equal laws, ordinances, acts, constitutions, and officers, from time to time, as shall be thought most meet and convenient for the general good of the Colony, unto which we promise all due submission and obedience...

...The means used by the English Government to people these new domains were of several kinds...a third system consisted in allowing a certain number of emigrants to constitute a political society under the protection of the mother country, and to govern themselves in whatever was not contrary to her laws. This mode of colonization, so remarkably favorable to liberty, was only adopted in New England...

...they constituted a society of their own accord, and it was not till thirty or forty years afterwards, under Charles II, that their existence was legally recognized by royal charter...

...They exercised the rights of sovereignty; they names their magistrates, concluded peace or declared was, made police regulations, and enacted laws as if their allegiance was due only to God.

...and there was scarcely a sin which was not subject to magisterial censure...

...It must not be forgotten that these fantastical and vexatious laws were not imposed by authority, but they were freely voted by all the persons interested, and that the manners of the community were even more austere and more puritanical than the laws...

And from "The Political Ideas of the Puritans," Herbert Osgood (Political Science Quarterly 1891)

...the tendency and spirit of the colony were so strongly democratic that, as the religious motive lost force, the restrictions it imposed on political equality and freedom necessarily disappeared, and approximation was made toward a perfect democracy. Alliance with Massachusetts checked, but could not stop development in this direction...

With regard to equity, consider the following from "A Biography of America" (link)

Since Puritans believed in equity, not equality, men of means and stature were given larger allocations of land for their families. Even so, a rough equality prevailed, and every family received land to build homes and farms.

Public Education too, has puritan roots. From "A History of Public Education in the United States" (link

The most preliminary form of public education was in existence in the 1600s in the New England colonies of Massachusetts, Connecticut and New Hampshire. The overriding belief on educating the children was more due to religious reasons and was easy to implement, as the only groups in existence were the Puritans and the Congregationalists. However, the influx of people from many countries and belonging to different faiths led to a weakening of the concept. People refused to learn only in English and opposed the clergy imposing their religious views through public education. By the middle of the eighteenth century, private schooling had become the norm.