Maybe I travel in the wrong circles, but that article was pretty weak sauce.
The role of Squanto is complicated.
Tisquantum, known as Squanto, did play a large role in helping the Pilgrims, as American children are taught. His people, the Patuxet, a band of the Wampanoag tribe, had lived on the site where the Pilgrims settled. When they arrived, he became a translator for them in diplomacy and trade with other native people, and showed them the most effective method for planting corn and the best locations to fish, Ms. Sheehan said.
That’s usually where the lesson ends, but that’s just a fraction of his story.
He was captured by the English in 1614 and later sold into slavery in Spain, Ms. Sheehan said. He spent several years in England, where he learned English. He returned to New England in 1619, only to find his entire Patuxet tribe dead from smallpox. He met the Pilgrims in March 1621.
This supposed "the rest of the story" was news to me 25 or 30 years ago. I didn't learn it in elementary or high school, but it has been pretty common knowledge among many homeschoolers for that long or longer. But there's a very relevant bit more that the article omits. Where the Separatists went was several hundred miles from where they intended. But they decided that where they landed was where God steered them. Where they landed, unknown to them, was the land of Squanto's now-dead Patuxet tribe. IOW the Separatists stole nothing.
There’s no evidence that turkey was served.
There was no mention of turkey being at the 1621 bounty, and there was no pie. Settlers lacked butter and wheat flour for a crust, and they had no oven for baking. What is known is that the Pilgrims harvested crops and that the Wampanoag brought five deer.
Big whoop! But this is inconsistent with - or flat out contradicts - this claim in the article:
There’s no evidence that native people were invited.
People who live off the land don't usually hunt too far ahead of what they need. That the Wampanoag brought 5 deer suggests they had been invited with enough time for them to hunt those deer (something that could take several days!).
It wasn’t just about religious freedom.
It’s been taught that the Pilgrims came because they were seeking religious freedom, but that’s not entirely true, Mr. Loewen said.
The Pilgrims had religious freedom in Holland, where they first arrived in the early 17th century. Like those who settled Jamestown, Va., in 1607, the Pilgrims came to North America to make money, Mr. Loewen said.
“They were also coming here in order to establish a religious theocracy, which they did,” he said. “That’s not exactly the same as coming here for religious freedom. It’s kind of coming here against religious freedom.”
Yes, it is true that the Separatists' purposes were more complicated than commonly taught.
They had religious freedom in Holland, but were having a hard time supporting themselves, and were not happy their children were losing their English heritage.
While it is true that the Separatists were partners with commercial investors, that was not the Separatists' primary interest. They would have known, even before leaving England, that they faced several years of subsistence living before they could send goods back to England.
Loewen and the NYT author stretch the meaning of "theocracy" beyond the breaking point. Here is
the text of the Mayflower Compact (emphasis mine):
In the name of God, Amen. We whose names are underwritten, the loyal subjects of our dread Sovereign Lord King James, by the Grace of God of Great Britain, France, and Ireland King, Defender of the Faith, etc. Having undertaken for the Glory of God and advancement of the Christian Faith and Honour of our King and Country, a Voyage to plant the First Colony in the Northern Parts of Virginia, do by these presents solemnly and mutually in the presence of God and one of another, Covenant and Combine ourselves together in a Civil Body Politic, for our better ordering and preservation and furtherance of the ends aforesaid; and by virtue hereof to enact, constitute and frame such just and equal Laws, Ordinances, Acts, Constitutions and Offices from time to time, as shall be thought most meet and convenient for the general good of the Colony, unto which we promise all due submission and obedience. In witness whereof we have hereunder subscribed our names at Cape Cod, the 11th of November, in the year of the reign of our Sovereign Lord King James, of England, France and Ireland the eighteenth, and of Scotland the fifty-fourth. Anno Domini 1620.
There's lots in it, of course, to PO DU-grade and other Progs. Twice it recognizes the kingship of James I - not very theocratic. Among their stated purposes is bringing honor to their king. Also not very theocratic, and they set themselves up as a "Civil Body Politic", rather than as any sort of theocracy. The signers agreed to various sorts of laws being written and civil offices being created as might be necessary for the good of their colony. IOW, while respected, the Bible and their elders did not rule the colony in any direct sense.
The truth the article masks and tries to re-spin is that Plimoth Plantation was organized to be very much like England, including having what we would call an established church. Plimoth Plantation was no more a theocracy than was Stuart England.