I think what's notable is that in the 18th century, when people thought about homogeneous culture, it wasn't just in terms of race, but religion and language. These were kinds of heterogeneity that had divided Europe but that the "American experiment" gave little heed to (though religious conflict, especially between Catholics and Protestants, would be a continual source of conflict in many cities in the 19th century). But that should be kept in the background as we think of all "homogeneity" that Taylor is writing about--they were well aware that they were heterogenous but that they had been United by something else. Out of many, one and all that. Nonconformists in England, that is everyone who wasn't part of the Church of England or the Church of Scotland, including Baptists, Quakers, Methodists, Puritans, etc., didn't gain full rights in the United Kingdom until 1828--two generations after American independence. Catholics didn't gain full rights until later still (though the most onerous restrictions were lifted in 1829).

But based on the religious diversity, it's clear that all those quotes about homogeneity don't mean quite what Taylor supposes they do.

The most founders did certainly assumed slavery was a part of the Republic, but two things are notable 1) most seemed to think slavery would eventually fade away 2) their opinions on free blacks varied widely. In many northern states, free blacks had the franchise same as whites (provided they met other restrictions of the state). Now, many whites and free blacks certainly did believe in "colonization", as the "back to Africa" movement was called, but it's unclear to me what proportion of the American population it was. Considering how little was done for it in light of the growing freeman population in the early Republic, I get the sense that for many it was more an abstract pipe dream than a policy they expected to bring about shortly.

Quakers, for instance, thought that blacks were racial equally. See the testimony of equality. There were notable free blacks in the early republic, such as Benjamin Banneker, who not coincidentally was educated in part through the Quakers. While I think the Quakers would be the most radical, I don't think they were completely alone on that side of the spectrum.

Hi, I'm afraid I've had to remove this thread as it links to and provides coverage for a white-supremacist hate group. Here on /r/AskHistorians, we have a policy of not providing a platform for racists, bigots, genocide deniers, etc.

We will happily reinstate the thread once it is edited to remove its link to the National Policy Institute, a far-right, white supremacist hate group.