I hope nothing in my posting to you on Calvin came across as 'vitriol;' if it did, I sincerely apologise, that was not my intention.
You have raised many points via these links, some new to me, some I'd like to challenge when time permits. The sources you provided, I will note, do strike me as short on objectivity and tending to the panegyric. That Calvinism was part of the intellectual heritage of the American colonists is certainly not disputed, but I would argue that still more contemporary ideals of the Enlightment were of greater moment. But our views here are likely to differ over matters of degree than kind, I suspect
I did note in my posting that I did not doubt Calvin was probably motivated by noble intentions; but did not elaborate my view that this can only be part of our assessment. It can be argued, though not by me, that Marx also had 'noble intentions' (the amelioration of poverty among the people displaced by the Industrial Revolution), but the most appalling tyrannical regimes and brutal, institutionalised forms of human degradation and misery arose from Marxist doctrines.
But it is folly to argue from 'intentions,' which we cannot properly know. Even if we grant some desirable features of the Genevan model--it nonetheless remains a powerful instance of the perils of theocracy and the evils which they can inflict.
And Calvin really cannot be held blameless in the murder (no other word will do) of Servetus, which he deemed necessary on politcal as much as religious grounds
More's the pity.
...the perils of theocracy
See, this is what I don't understand. What's so perilous about a nation guided by God, obedient to His word and productive according to His will?
Yeah, that's a real fright-fest. God save us from Himself.
Do you call capital punishment "murder?"