Foundations matter: Why Vermont Differs From New Hampshire

New Hampshire was a crown colony in which most power was held by the royal governor.  The legislature was weak – as it still is.  So the foundation is that of a government with authoritarian tendencies combined with a popular hatred of that government.  Plus ça change.

The New Hampshire Grants (that became VT) were on their own, were governed democratically (if you were a man) and the elected representatives of the towns created Vermont and its government first banning slavery.  I love the preamble, 1 paragraph about Britain, and pages about the nefarious Yorkers.  In short, the government is us.  It is telling that Ralph Flanders, who first attacked McCarthy, was very much a conservative of his times.  

At about the same time, an attempt to pass a Vermont Smith Act (basically banning the Communist Party) was laughed out of the legislature just as Louis Wyman, A-G of NH was on the warpath against so-called Communists etc.

Foundations matter.  (For another time, check out Pakistan & India.)

One thought on “Foundations matter: Why Vermont Differs From New Hampshire

  1. I don’t know if that explains why New Hampshire swung wildly to the right for both Houses and nearly so for the Governorship.

    On one side of the Connecticut, Democrats and left-leaning Republicans were winning handily. Just across the river, Tea Party Republicans were taking the ballots like nobody’s business.

    That’s just weird.

Comments are closed.