@herag speaking as a Quaker born and raised by Philadelphia Quakers, yes.

@herag although to be fair, my Quakerism is mostly cultural. I'm no longer "seeking faith" as I'm quite a happy faithless person.

@lightweight it's funny, the Quakers I know very similarly are cultural Quakers and don't seek faith either, but they are some of the nicest 'friends' (please excuse the pun) I have ever had.

A lot of them still go to the meetings too! Which I think is fantastic, to be honest.

@lightweight I am also very happy to see that you are an adherent to the Oxford Comma. :jrbd:

@herag Having read the thing, it's pretty interesting, although perhaps less of an anarchy than I had hoped. More of a frontier province where the King and his tax collectors just didn't bother to turn up for a few years. Whatever the people did get up to in the absence of any enforcement of the various draconian laws they were nominally still subject to isn't recorded there in any detail. But it's easy to imagine that 10,000 people in a province the size of Pennsylvania wouldn't have much use for any government. Such situations got to be much less common over the past century or three.

It reminds me also of the story of Thomas Morton and Merrymount, which I came across a few weeks ago: https://publicdomainreview.org/essay/lord-of-misrule-thomas-mortons-american-subversions

@zudlig oh that is good. I am reading it now. I won't lie, as I read through Rothbard's analysis again I did get that same feeling. I have actually recorded the episode twice now. I am hoping a third take will actually capture my take on the Quakers in 1684-88.

But I agree with you, if the king had sent his full force against them, I do think they would have failed.

Stay tune because my take is a little different. :jrbd: it is more... well I won't spoil it. :jrbd:

Sign in to participate in the conversation

Church of the SubGenius Members-Only MastoDobbs.