Utopian and godly colonial ideals structurally rejected lawyer mediation

Evidence

There were various reasons for distrusting lawyers. The Puritan image of the ideal state, in Massachusetts Bay, had no place for lawyers. Revolutionary or Utopian regimes tend to be hostile to lawyers, at least at first. These regimes have to get rid of the lawyers of the old regime, or at least keep them under control. New commonwealths start with new law and new habits. Some colonists, who felt oppressed in England, brought over a strong dislike for all of the servants of the English government. Merchants and planters wanted to run their own affairs, without intermediaries. An efficient and godly society, which was the ideal in some colonies, had no use for a profession that claimed special privileges and spoke a private, esoteric language. The Quakers of the Middle Atlantic put top value on harmony and peace. Their ideal was the “Common Peacemaker,” and simple, nontechnical justice. Lawyers were sharp, contentious—​and unnecessary—​people. — Lawrence M. Friedman, A History of American Law, 514

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: A position built on denying mediation paradoxically produces direct immediacy and rigid opposition — Catherine Malabou, The Future of Hegel: Plasticity,…, 802; Imperialism as a moral landscape resists the agent-versus-resister framing of legal reform; The non-interference ideal served to legitimate colonial subjugation — Philip Pettit, Republicanism: A Theory of Freedom and…, 1211

Broader Connections

• A position built on denying mediation paradoxically produces direct immediacy and rigid opposition #expands (0.85) — Catherine Malabou, The Future of Hegel, 802
• The non-interference ideal served to legitimate colonial subjugation #corroborates (0.85) — Philip Pettit, Republicanism, 1211
• Imperialism as a moral landscape resists the agent-versus-resister framing of legal reform #corroborates (0.78)