[thisiscorrect]

The Puritans were especially strident in imposing their beliefs though. Their concept of collective salvation meant they'd brook no dissent at all. And so _anyone_ not toeing the line was treated as a mortal threat and could be subject to immense cruelty.

Interestingly, many descendants of these Puritans are still just as willing to impose their own religious beliefs on the rest of humanity. Although some details of the religion are vastly different, its rough shape is still the same (humanity can be remade and perfected, everyone must join in this endeavor or we're all lost, rejection of hierarchy, etc.) I'd wager this is even the source of many of the moral conceipts we see in America's foreign policy. Every farflung tribe on Earth must organize a government the way we organize ours. Every society must tolerate the same beliefs that we do, and also not tolerate the same things that we do not.

[dash2]

I don't think they had a concept of collective salvation. They were very clear that salvation was individual, and that even people who thought they were saved, and who everyone around them thought was saved, might not be. I think you're right that they were strict about imposing their beliefs, at least in C17 New England, but I am not sure that relates much to their foreign policy wrt the Indian tribes. But I will defer to someone who knows more.

[thisiscorrect]

A very accessible book which discusses exactly the intersection of Puritan beliefs and their treatment of American Indians is "American Nations" (https://www.google.com/books/edition/American_Nations/Oc5VDw...).

https://www.chronicle.com/article/patriotism-and-the-puritan... is an essay on a related topic.