Ongoing Influence of Original Colonies - Essay Example

?The New England Colonies incorporated Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Connecticut, and Rhode Island and Providence. Together, these colonies embodied the view of a coastal, agrarian American society, organized around the family unit and religious beliefs. New England was formed primarily by the motivation to have religious freedom in the new world, liberated from the persecution and pressures exerted in England. Pilgrims founded Plymouth, one of the first settlements, in the 17th century; subsequently, the Puritans of Governor John Winthrop established a commonwealth in Massachusetts Bay. These two movements, along with other immigrations to the new world, formed the foundation for the cultural, religious, and political societies that would develop in that part of America. Some of these elements, including the desire for religious freedom, are reflected in contemporary culture and politics. For instance, Massachusetts Senator John Kerry introduces the “Workplace Religious Freedom Act” every year, never with the support to pass it. Religious freedom in New England seems to be as pressing a need as it was for the Pilgrims and Puritans in the 17th century. Noticeably, Pilgrim and Puritan laws were not created in order to protect religious diversity, as might be the justification for contemporary legislation. But the spirit of the law as protecting, instead of hindering, one’s freedom to one’s own ideas is the same in both cases. The motivation behind the bill is to protect citizens from restricting workplace religious activities1. It accomplishes this by closing loopholes related to “reasonable accommodations” to employees’ religious needs. Kerry’s legislation is aimed at enforcing religious freedom in the workplace throughout the entire country; nevertheless, the value of religious freedom seems only to be a value worth actively pursuing in the region where the New England Colonies developed. At the level of the state and the region, New England states live up to the promise of religious freedom instilled into their ancestors. The article introducing the topic of religious freedom deals mainly with a New York City ordinance, but it touches on the subject in the context of the entire northeast, particularly Massachusetts where John Kerry is from. On a more practical level, New England has always relied on the fishing industry for economic viability, due mainly to the fact that fish is an abundant resource for New England industry and to the fact that fishing was established early in its history. In fact, the Colony of Massachusetts Bay began as a fishing venture motivated primarily by profit. Fish, along with timber and crops, were exported to every corner of the world from New England’s famous port towns. From the point of view of any modern New Englander from Gloucester, New Bedford or Plymouth, which are all steeped in American history, fishing has a central place in the legacy of their hometowns. In an opinion piece about fishing regulations2, the writer sides with small fishing operations that have gone out of business because of “catch shares.” Catch shares refer to fishery management systems that dedicate a secure privilege to harvest a specific area or percentage of a fishery’s total allowable catch to individuals, communities or associations. In doing so, he or she is siding with the traditional New England orientation toward the small business structure that values family. Also, the article emphasizes the cuts being made to organizations designed to protect fishing, which shows just how much New England values (and always has valued) its fishing infrastructure. Briefly alluding to the history of the region and its dependence on fishing for its economic and social livelihood, the author is appealing both logically and emotionally to a sense of connection to the past for a prosperous future. The Middle Colonies, made up of Pennsylvania, New York, New Jersey, and Delaware, were considerably more diverse in their origin that the New England Colonies. Although some came to the Middle Colonies to practice their own religion independently, particularly those who followed William Penn to Pennsylvania, many also came to make money and have the freedom to work. Immigrants from England and other parts of Europe, along with indentured servants, made up a large workforce at the ironworks and shipyards. Philadelphia, for instance, the largest city in all of the colonies at that time, was established as a port: a center of commerce and trade that would ensure prosperity for a city of people who could practice their Quaker religion (as well as other religions) freely. Especially close to Labor Day, one can see in newspaper opinion columns, the importance of labor and work is to the people who grew up in the regions of the original Middle Colonies. In one opinion piece of the Delaware Voice3, the writer opines, “Labor needs to work with corporate America to bring them back to America, where there is a ready, willing and able workforce…” In the 18th century, labor led to vibrant trade with England, iron production in Maryland, and high-yield Pennsylvania farms. It is no wonder, realizing where the attitude that labor is essential for an economy originated, that a newspaper in Delaware would come out in open support for labor unions in particular. Part of the promise of the United States, especially in the Middle Colonies where job openings were plentiful, is the opportunity of what we know today as the “middle class.” The Delaware Voice column discusses the middle class as the result of the labor movement in the United States; although the accuracy of that attribution is a different story, one can see the kind of attitude present in that statement as reflective of a pro-labor sort of sentiment. Certainly, the Middle Colonies during the 17th century where pro-labor, when there was limitless space in which to expand one’s business. Even though there were no unions per se during the Colonial Era, at least as we know them today, the value of hard work and earning one’s keep were definitely present in the region that includes Delaware in modern times. In addition, because the Middle Colonies were an attraction for a diverse, multicultural workforce, there was also an explicit value of tolerance in their culture. Today, diversity is clearest in the city of New York; however, there are still challenges in creating an open society. In the New York Times, one writer reports on Anti-Shariah legislation in other parts of the country, saying that it leads to a hostile environment that demotes the importance of tolerance in the United States4. There may be other explanations for why New York and the Middle Colonies region remains so culturally diverse and tolerant, but a very reasonable answer is that this appreciation of differences is a remnant from the Colonial Era in which it was an unpleasant fact. Knowing that the Middle Colonies, including New York, depended economically on diversity and tolerance, it is clear why modern New Yorkers are quick to dismiss attempts to reduce diversity in other parts of the country. Part of that is recognition that global trade is an economic value that is contrary with limiting the size and skill in a workforce. An interesting point to consider is that during the Colonial Era, America had not yet formed a national identity, so there was no room to draw distinction between itself and others. This seems to have changed, as now, according to the editorial, one official has declared Islamic law as a set of rules that promote “the destruction of the national existence of the United States.” In contrast to New Englanders and some in the Middle Colonies, the Southern Colonies were formed primarily to make money. Instead of small family farms, practicing religion freely, the South was made up of large plantations that grew crops that were difficult or impossible to grow in other regions. The Southern Colonies represented Maryland, Virginia, the Carolinas, and Georgia, each of which was almost entirely agricultural. Very few cities developed in the South, especially due to the lack of industrialization and the desire to have children learn about the farm system, as opposed to going to centralized education. One can still see the agricultural emphasis in Southern culture today, where large plots of land are owned by private individuals. One can see that in an article reporting on the damage done to Southern crops by Hurricane Irene; the article shows two workers storing tobacco owned by a plantation owner after the storm5. The report says that the profit from the crops support the plantation family, the work crew, and the landowners he rents from. Just like in the 18th century, the economic well-being of many Southern states is tied up in the yields of the profitable cash crops like tobacco and cotton. Even if society is stratified, each class feels the effects of a down year or an up year, whether it is the landowner or the work crew. Hurricane Irene, as a natural disaster, affects all layers of society, which demonstrates the shared economic and social fabric that has continued on to the modern day. Clearly, these plantations are still a crucial cultural and economic institution that can drag down society when disasters strike. Culturally and economically, the role of crops like tobacco and cotton in the South is just as large as it was during the 18th century when the Southern Colonies traded with the British Empire. With nearly one hundred percent losses in those tobacco plants still in the field, one can see the systemic role that agriculture plays. This of course affects too how much will be sold at market to states that, just like in the Colonial Era, depend on a reliable crop of tobacco, cotton, and sugar. Rising costs for these goods, just as it would have two hundred years ago, will affect the way each of the three regions does business. Also inherent to the culture of the Southern colonies was a natural hierarchy, which set a high value on inequality, whether it was between races that developed because of the importation and use of slave labor or between classes of people working in the fields. Unlike the Middle Colonies, which depended mostly on a diverse but freeman workforce, the South made the economical decision to use slavery, which is a culture to an extent that still exists. One manifestation of that is the hierarchical nature of Southern society that Patricia Hunt alludes to in her evaluation of Labor Day6. She acknowledges class-based collectivism that held over from slave-era Southern Colonies to the Jim Crow Era and then, to today. She offers the motto, “Offend a member of my class, offend me.” In this kind of environment, there is a power differential between employer and employees that is inherent more so to social norms than any workplace alone. It is certainly reasonable to conclude that if the South is still as hierarchically structured as it was in the 18th century, that it is a cultural remnant from the time of slaves and slaveholders. However, one would be remiss not to acknowledge shifting attitudes, even in the modern South, to a more equitable viewpoint. Even Hunt, who admits to a Southern hierarchy, is advocating for a position very similar to the one brought forward in the Delaware Voice about the importance of labor, but it is more individualistic than a labor union. Hunt says, “Southerners didn’t believe in labor unions.” This may have to do with attitudes about decentralization in the Southern Colonies. Read More