When the Puritans are demonized, but no one even knows who the Quakers are, you can be sure that the Quakers have taken hold of the original Puritan institutions.

One place I break with Moldbug is I think the Puritans, left to themselves, might been able to *reproduce* themselves.

But when their faults got cordycepted by the Quakers, who thought everyone could be a Quaker, the whole thing broke apart.

The Puritans had hard Puritan values. They are *famous* for judgment. Hated for it. By...

...the Quakers, meanwhile, had Public Universal Friend.

The Puritans were, obviously, a priestly people. By contrast, the Quakers were merchants and burghers.

The post-WW2 order is a pacifist, unitarian universalist belief. It might have *required* Puritanism to get there, but it is entirely Quaker—universalist/slash mercantile—in behavior and practice.

...does that describe any other dominant 20th century group?

The most basic way to know this is true is to ask, Who was the most quintessential American?

And who was most concerned about the growing Quaker influence on the Puritan northern founding stock?

The answer is the same to both questions: Benjamin Franklin