Sign in to follow this  
Hypercapnic Tom

A Colonial Thanksgiving

Recommended Posts

Thanksgiving of 1621 was pretty rough...

 

And so, as beefy gladiators chase a pigskin down the field in Miami or Detroit, we settle into our living rooms, loosen our belts, wave off a second helping of pie, and remind the little ones this is the day we echo the thanks of the Pilgrims, who gathered in the autumn of 1621 to celebrate the first bountiful harvest in a land of plenty.

 

That first winter in the New World had been a harsh one, of course. Half the colonists had died. But the survivors were hard-working and tenacious, and - with the aid of a little agricultural expertise graciously on loan from the Wampanoag, the Narragansett, and the Mohegan - were able to thank the Creator for an abundant harvest, that second autumn in a new land.

 

The only problem with the tale, unfortunately, is that it's not true.

 

Oh, the part about the Indians graciously showing the new settlers how to raise beans and corn is right enough. But in a November, 1985 article in "The Free Market," monthly publication of the Ludwig von Mises Institute, author and historian Richard J. Marbury pointed out: "This official story is ... a fairy tale, a whitewashed and sanitized collection of half-truths which divert attention away from Thanksgiving's real meaning."

 

The problem with the official story, Mr. Marbury points out, is that "The harvest of 1621 was not bountiful, nor were the colonists hardworking or tenacious. 1621 was a famine year and many of the colonists were lazy thieves."

 

In his "History of Plymouth Plantation," the governor of the colony, William Bradford, reported that the colonists went hungry for years because they refused to work in the fields, preferring instead to steal. Bradford recalled for posterity that the colony was riddled with "corruption and discontent." The crops were small because "much was stolen both by night and day, before it became scarce eatable."

 

Although in the harvest feasts of 1621 and 1622 "all had their hungry bellies filled," that relief was short-lived, and deaths from illness due to malnutrition continued.

 

Then, Mr. Marbury points out, "something changed." By harvest time, 1623, Gov. Bradford was reporting that "Instead of famine now God gave them plenty, and the face of things was changed, to the rejoicing of the hearts of many, for which they blessed God." Thereafter, the first governor wrote, "Any general want or famine hath not been amongst them since to this day." Why, by 1624, so much food was produced that the colonists actually began (start ital)exporting(end ital) corn.

 

What on earth had happened?

 

After the poor harvest of 1622, writes Bradford, "they began to think how they might raise as much corn as they could, and obtain a better crop." And what solution was decided upon? It turned out to be simple enough. In 1623 Gov. Bradford simply "gave each household a parcel of land and told them they could keep what they produced, or trade it away as they saw fit."

 

What? Wasn't that the American way from the start?

 

Not at all. The Mayflower Compact had required that "all profits & benefits that are got by trade, working, fishing, or any other means" were to be placed in the common stock of the colony, and that, "all such persons as are of this colony, are to have their meat, drink, apparel, and all provisions out of the common stock."

 

A person was to put into the common stock all he could, and take out only what he needed - a concept so attractive on its surface that it would be adopted as the equally disastrous ruling philosophy for all of Eastern Europe, some 300 years later.

 

"This 'from each according to his ability, to each according to his need' was an early form of socialism, and it is why the Pilgrims were starving," Marbury explains.

 

Gov. Bradford writes that during those terrible first three years "Young men that are most able and fit for labor and service" complained about being forced to "spend their time and strength to work for other men's wives and children." Since "the strong, or man of parts, had no more in division of victuals and clothes, than he that was weak," the strong men simply refused to work, and the amount of food produced was never adequate.

 

In historian Marbury's words, Gov. Bradford "abolished socialism" in the colony, "replacing it with a free market, and that was the end of famines."

 

In fact, this lesson had to be learned over and over again in early America. "Many early groups of colonists set up socialist states, all with the same terrible results," Marbury notes. "At Jamestown, established in 1607, out of every shipload of settlers that arrived, less than half would survive their first 12 months in America. Most of the work was being done by only one-fifth of the men, the other four-fifths choosing to be parasites. In the winter of 1609-10, called 'The Starving Time,' the population fell from 500 to 60.

 

"Then the Jamestown colony was converted to a free market, and the results were every bit as dramatic as those at Plymouth. In 1614, Colony Secretary Ralph Hamor wrote that after the switch there was 'plenty of food, which every man by his own industry may easily and doth procure.' He said that when the socialist system had prevailed, 'we reaped not so much corn from the labors of 30 men as three men have done for themselves now.' "

 

They say those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it. Sadly this was a lesson the people of Russia had to learn all over again - at the pain of equally devastating starvation and penury - in our own century. By the 1980s, when the discredited and bloodstained rulers of Russia finally threw up their hands and allowed farmers to raise private crops and sell them for profit on a mere 10 percent of their lands, once again more crops were produced on that 10 percent of the land than on the 90 percent devoted to "collective agriculture," the system under which - as the bitter Russian joke would have it - "We pretend to work, and they pretend to pay us."

 

Yes, America is a bounteous land. But the source of that bounty - and the good fortune for which we annually gather to give thanks - lies not merely in the fertility of the soil or the frequency of the rains - for there is hardly a more fertile breadbasket on the face of the earth than the Soviet Ukraine.

 

No, the source of our bounty was the discovery made by the Pilgrims in 1623, that when men are allowed to hold their own land as private property, to eat what they raise and keep the profits from any surplus they sell, the entire community becomes one of prosperity and plenty.

 

Whereas, an economic system which grants the lazy and the shiftless some "right" to prosper off the looted fruits of another man's labor, under the guise of enforced "compassion," will inevitably descend into envy, theft, squalor, and starvation.

 

Though many would still incrementally impose on us some new variant of the "noble socialist experiment," this is still at heart a free country with a bedrock respect for the sanctity of private property - and a land bounteous precisely because it's free. It's for that we give thanks - the corn and beans and turkey serving as mere symbols of that true and underlying blessing - on the fourth Thursday of each November.

 

God bless America - land of the free.

 

Vin Suprynowicz is assistant editorial page editor of the Las Vegas Review-Journal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Property and the first Thanksgiving

 

At Thanksgiving, Americans reflect on their blessings and hope for uplifting family gatherings of togetherness and unity, with the Pilgrims used as examples of peace, harmony, and thankfulness. However, while the Pilgrims' 1623 "way of thanksgiving" represents what we wish to infuse in Thanksgiving, Plymouth Colony before 1623 was closer to a Thanksgiving host's worst fears—resentments surface, harsh words are spoken, and people turn angry and unhappy with one another.

 

The Pilgrims' unhappiness was caused by their system of common property (not adopted, as often asserted, from their religious convictions, but required against their will by the colony's sponsors). The fruits of each person's efforts went to the community, and each received a share from the common wealth. This caused severe strains among the members, as Colony Governor William Bradford recorded:

 

" . . . the young men . . . did repine that they should spend their time and strength to work for other men's wives and children without any recompense. The strong . . . had not more in division . . . than he that was weak and not able to do a quarter the other could; this was thought injustice. The aged and graver men to be ranked and equalized in labors and victuals, clothes, etc . . . thought it some indignity and disrespect unto them. And the men's wives to be commanded to do service for other men, as dressing their meat, washing their clothes, etc., they deemed it a kind of slavery, neither could many husbands well brook it."

 

Bradford summarized the effects of their common property system:

 

"For this community of property (so far as it went) was found to breed much confusion and discontentment and retard much employment that would have been to their benefit and comfort . . . all being to have alike, and all to do alike . . . if it did not cut off those relations that God hath set amongst men, yet it did at least much diminish and take off the mutual respects that should be preserved amongst them."

 

How did the Pilgrims move from this dysfunctional system to the situation we try to emulate in our family gatherings? In the spring of 1623, they decided to let people produce for their own benefit:

 

"All their victuals were spent . . . no supply was heard of, neither knew they when they might expect any. So they began to think how they might raise as much corn as they could, and obtain a better crop than they had done, that they might not still thus languish in misery. At length . . . the Governor (with the advice of the chiefest among them) gave way that they should set corn every man for his own particular, and in that regard trust to themselves. . . . And so assigned to every family a parcel of land . . . "

 

The results were dramatic:

 

"This had very good success, for it made all hands very industrious, so as much more corn was planted than otherwise would have been by any means the Governor or any other could use, and saved him a great deal of trouble, and gave far better content. The women now went willingly into the field, and took their little ones with them to set corn, which before would allege weakness and inability, whom to have compelled would have been thought great tyranny and oppression."

 

That was quite a change from their previous situation, where severe whippings had been resorted to as an inducement to more labor effort, with little success other than in creating discontent.

 

Despite the Pilgrims' increased efforts in 1623, a summer drought threatened their crops. Following their beliefs, they offered contrition for their sins. Then the drought broke, which led to the Thanksgiving we still try to emulate. And as historian Russell Kirk reported, "never again were the Pilgrims short of food." It is appropriate to remember the Pilgrims as Americans celebrate Thanksgiving. Though we have incomparably more than they did, we can learn much from their "way of thanksgiving."

 

But we should also remember that our material blessings are the fruits of America's system of private property rights, whose power for peaceful and productive cooperation the Pilgrims began to prove by experiment almost four centuries ago, because those rights, and the freedoms and prosperity they entail, are under constant assault today.

 

------

 

Gary M. Galles is a professor of economics at Pepperdine University.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The American Socialist Experiment

 

On November 11, 1620, the Mayflower landed at Plymouth Rock. The ship lay at anchor until March, the pilgrims living onboard while permanent housing was being built. When the Mayflower finally left, 27 adults and 23 children were left of the 102 people who set out across the ocean. Their governor was William Bradford and under his leadership, these first Americans began to make a new life in the New World.

 

What very few Americans today know is this very first colony on the shores of America started out as a socialist colony. The Pilgrims at Plymouth set up a common store that worked on the principle of "From Each According To His Ability - To Each According To His Need". Everything that the colony produced was placed in the common store and was then distributed out as needed.

 

For two years the colony worked to create a socialist Utopia but even with an additional 30 settlers who arrived a year after the Mayflower, the colony barely survived. Each winter the colonist would go hungry being reduced to rations of a quarter pound of bread at times. Governor Bradford relates his experiences concerning the socialist state he had helped to create:

 

"The experience that was had in this commone course and condition, tired sundrie years, and that amongst godly and sober men, may well evince the vanitie of that conceite of Platos and other ancients, applauded by some of later times; --that the taking away of propertie, and bringing in communitie into a comone wealth would make them happy and florishing; as if they were wiser than God. For this comunitie (so farr as it was) was found to breed much confusion and discontente, and retard much imployment that would have been to their benefite and comforte. For the yong-men that were most able and fitte for labour and service did repine that they should spend their time and streingth to worke for other mens wives and children, with out any recompense. The strong, or man of parts, had no more in divission of victails and cloaths, than he that was weake and not able to doe a quarter the other could; this was thought injustice. The aged and graver men to be ranked and equalised in labours, and victuals, cloaths, etc., with the meaner and younger sorte, thought it some indignite and disrespect unto them. And for men's wives to be commanded to doe service for other men, as dresing their meate, washing their cloaths, etc., they deemed it a kind of slavery, neither could many husbands well brooke it. "

 

Finally, in 1623, Governor Bradford called a meeting to discuss how to have a more productive growing season and be better prepared for the next winter. Governor Bradford writes:

 

"All this while no supply was heard of, neither knew they when they might expecte any. So they [the pilgims] begane to thinke how they might raise as much corne as they could, and obtaine a beter crope than they had done, that they might not still thus languish in miserie. At length after much debate of things, the Gov. (with the advise of the cheefest amongest them) gave way that they should set downe every man for his owne perticuler, and in that regard trust to themselves... And so assigned to every family a parceel of land. This had very good success; for it made all hands very industrious, so as much more corne was planted than other waise would have bene by any means the Gov. or any other could use, and saved him a great deall of trouble, and gave farr better contente. The women now wente willingly into the feild, and tooke their litle-ons with them to set corne, which before would aledge weakness, and inabilitie; whom to have compelled would have bene thought great tiranie and opression."

 

It was at this meeting between Governor Bradford and the chief members of the colony that the American free enterprise system was born. Governor Bradford writes about the results of this system:

 

"By this time harvest was come, and instead of famine, now God gave them plentie, and the face of things was changed, to the rejoysing of the harts of many, for which they blessed God. And in the effect of their perticular planting was well seene, for all had, one way and other, pretty well to bring the year aboute, and some of the abler sorte and more industrious had to spare, and sell to others, 50 as any generall wante of famine hath not been amongest them since to this day."

 

This little known failed experiment in American socialism isn't taught in today's schools. If it was, our children might grow up to doubt governmental programs that redistribute wealth "from each according to his ability - too each according to his need."

 

Source: William Bradford, History of Plymouth Plantation, 1620-1647

 

Charles Wickwire is a Computer Specialist who likes to share his opinion with those who are interested and even those who are not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good stuff. While I've been aware of the actual history of the landing and settlement for a number of years now since reading Bradford's Log, it was good to take in the three refreshers you posted above. Thanks for that, the message and Happy Thanksgiving.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't buy into the idea that a communal arrangement has to fail because everything from the Kibbutz movement to co-op housing to Mennonite colonies to seem to prosper.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Happy Thanksgiving to all my Republican and conservative bretheren. Let us give thanks that we weren't born godless socialist democRATS like the pilgrims.

 

To all of you liberal national socialist democRATS who think that Thanksgiving is a time not to exacerbate divisions between us, and that there was only one poster who would turn a holiday like Thanksgiving into a political statement, GFY, the Americans are celebrating today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't buy into the idea that a communal arrangement has to fail because everything from the Kibutz movement to Mennonite colonies seem to prosper.

 

That's the great thing about free choice. You can buy whatever you want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Happy Thanksgiving to all my Republican and conservative bretheren. Let us give thanks that we weren't born godless socialist democRATS like the pilgrims.

 

To all of you liberal national socialist democRATS who think that Thanksgiving is a time not to exacerbate divisions between us, and that there was only one poster who would turn a holiday like Thanksgiving into a political statement, GFY, the Americans are celebrating today.

 

+1

 

 

patriotic_turkey.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't buy into the idea that a communal arrangement has to fail because everything from the Kibutz movement to Mennonite colonies seem to prosper.

 

That's the great thing about free choice. You can buy whatever you want.

 

Thanks to a free republic he can choose to or to not to join into a commune.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not too sure about all of you other turkey-fuckers here, but we're celebrating Thanksgiving in the Booth house in the traditional manner.

 

1). Cook up a metric shit ton of fine food.

 

2). Invite all of our neighbors over to share in the feast.

 

3). And after we feed them all until they can no longer move

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

we're gonna kill them and take their land.

 

 

 

Happy Thanksgiving Kidz..........B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not too sure about all of you other turkey-fuckers here, but we're celebrating Thanksgiving in the Booth house in the traditional manner.

 

1). Cook up a metric shit ton of fine food.

 

2). Invite all of our neighbors over to share in the feast.

 

3). And after we feed them all until they can no longer move

 

 

 

 

we're gonna kill them and take their land.

 

 

 

Happy Thanksgiving Kidz.......... B)

 

Didn't you watch Seinfeld? Turkey and redwine. Sleep shall soon follow. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Signfield? Nah, I don't watch, wear or eat anything that eminates from that side of the country.........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I cannot imagine living at a better time than now. Unless our leaders Government and Business get their collective heads out of their butts life on this planet is going to start looking like 3rd World everywhere unless you are very wealthy. Soon there will only be Haves and Have Nots.

 

Having said that I would not have wanted to live back in any era. Good food, clean water and medical care were poor at best and ther was not innocent until proven guilty. You were burned at the stake for whatever the crowed said you did. Screw that.

 

I give thanks that I am alive now and pray that my son does not have to live in a society that degrades into something worse that we have.

 

Its Turkey time here on the US West Coast, but I am a ham man so time to eat.

Happy Thanks Giving to all and try to leave the world a better place of the next generation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Happy Thanksgiving to all my Republican and conservative bretheren. Let us give thanks that we weren't born godless socialist democRATS like the pilgrims.

 

To all of you liberal national socialist democRATS who think that Thanksgiving is a time not to exacerbate divisions between us, and that there was only one poster who would turn a holiday like Thanksgiving into a political statement, GFY, the Americans are celebrating today.

 

The political forum is uninteresting without different perspectives. I don't learn anything from other libertarians, and don't like talking politics with them.

 

Did you learn something? Was reading this really such a negative experience? It was not intended to be. Happy Thanksgiving from your fellow American!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Happy Thanksgiving to all my Republican and conservative bretheren. Let us give thanks that we weren't born godless socialist democRATS like the pilgrims.

 

To all of you liberal national socialist democRATS who think that Thanksgiving is a time not to exacerbate divisions between us, and that there was only one poster who would turn a holiday like Thanksgiving into a political statement, GFY, the Americans are celebrating today.

 

The political forum is uninteresting without different perspectives. I don't learn anything from other libertarians, and don't like talking politics with them.

 

Did you learn something? Was reading this really such a negative experience? It was not intended to be. Happy Thanksgiving from your fellow American!

Good read Tom, on Thanksgiving or any other day.

 

Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good read? Thank you?

 

Have you been cocktailing all day?..........B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Good read? Thank you?

 

Have you been cocktailing all day?..........B)

I never needed a drink to be happy; the last drop of alcohol that I had was bottled DAB beer with Tuesday's dinner.

 

It's just that we don't often get new posters as interesting as Tom Ray.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ummm....

 

Someone seems to have taken over akaGP's account. Perhaps we should alert the mods! :lol:

 

Happy Thanksgiving, George.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Good read? Thank you?

 

Have you been cocktailing all day?..........B)

I never needed a drink to be happy; the last drop of alcohol that I had was bottled DAB beer with Tuesday's dinner.

 

It's just that we don't often get new posters as interesting as Tom Ray.

 

 

Personally, I've never trusted a hetero male with two first names............B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Good stuff. While I've been aware of the actual history of the landing and settlement for a number of years now since reading Bradford's Log, it was good to take in the three refreshers you posted above. Thanks for that, the message and Happy Thanksgiving.

 

For those interested in trying to decipher Bradford's Olde English, the relevant stuff starts around page 134 in that book, which you can read online at flaps15's link.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't buy into the idea that a communal arrangement has to fail because everything from the Kibbutz movement to co-op housing to Mennonite colonies to seem to prosper.

It's a scale thing. Small communities survive and prosper because everyone in the community knows how each of the others can contribute and the extent to which they do contribute. If you fail to live up to your responsibilities to the community you are ordered out of the co-op, shunned or otherwise socially disciplined. In these sorts of communities, no one is shy of telling you that your aren't contributing to the expected level.

 

It's when communties expand and become 'societies' that the trouble begins. Once the group starts ordering individuals around instead of out, the whole social structure changes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Happy Thanksgiving to all my Republican and conservative bretheren. Let us give thanks that we weren't born godless socialist democRATS like the pilgrims.

 

To all of you liberal national socialist democRATS who think that Thanksgiving is a time not to exacerbate divisions between us, and that there was only one poster who would turn a holiday like Thanksgiving into a political statement, GFY, the Americans are celebrating today.

Touched a nerve here Tom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They landed at Plymouth Rock because they were running out of beer. The original destination was Roanoke Virginia. The water wasn't safe to drink and the beer wasn't going to last so they diverted. Patriots/Red Soxs = not enough beer.

 

Happy Thanksgiving to all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Happy Thanksgiving to all my Republican and conservative bretheren. Let us give thanks that we weren't born godless socialist democRATS like the pilgrims.

 

To all of you liberal national socialist democRATS who think that Thanksgiving is a time not to exacerbate divisions between us, and that there was only one poster who would turn a holiday like Thanksgiving into a political statement, GFY, the Americans are celebrating today.

Touched a nerve here Tom.

Perhaps everyone else will have forgotten the tenor of our national discourse in November of 2009, and the efforts to divide the American people, but I haven't. I recall being caught up in the frenzy of Socialists trying to take our country from us via our healthcare system, and that a grassroots group of True Patriots were there to spread the good word and save us from repeating our collectivist errors. I appreciated and appreciate the history provided by Tom's story, and now that our national dialogue is so much more civil and Americans are back in (some) power, I am far more subdued. I wouldn't think of telling democRATS "GFY" on this fine day in 2011. I invite all democRATS to join with Americans and celebrate Thanksgiving and the bounty that we all share I f-ing EARNED (but am willing to share because of the holiday).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Happy Thanksgiving to all my Republican and conservative bretheren. Let us give thanks that we weren't born godless socialist democRATS like the pilgrims.

 

To all of you liberal national socialist democRATS who think that Thanksgiving is a time not to exacerbate divisions between us, and that there was only one poster who would turn a holiday like Thanksgiving into a political statement, GFY, the Americans are celebrating today.

Touched a nerve here Tom.

 

That was 2009, and people come to PA to have nerves touched.

 

smileycowGene.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Happy Thanksgiving to all my Republican and conservative bretheren. Let us give thanks that we weren't born godless socialist democRATS like the pilgrims.

 

To all of you liberal national socialist democRATS who think that Thanksgiving is a time not to exacerbate divisions between us, and that there was only one poster who would turn a holiday like Thanksgiving into a political statement, GFY, the Americans are celebrating today.

Touched a nerve here Tom.

Perhaps everyone else will have forgotten the tenor of our national discourse in November of 2009, and the efforts to divide the American people, but I haven't. I recall being caught up in the frenzy of Socialists trying to take our country from us via our healthcare system, and that a grassroots group of True Patriots were there to spread the good word and save us from repeating our collectivist errors. I appreciated and appreciate the history provided by Tom's story, and now that our national dialogue is so much more civil and Americans are back in (some) power, I am far more subdued. I wouldn't think of telling democRATS "GFY" on this fine day in 2011. I invite all democRATS to join with Americans and celebrate Thanksgiving and the bounty that we all share I f-ing EARNED (but am willing to share because of the holiday).

Your divisive democRATS vs Americans shit was mildly amusing at first but is wearing thin. You need some new material.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Property and the first Thanksgiving

 

At Thanksgiving, Americans reflect on their blessings and hope for uplifting family gatherings of togetherness and unity, with the Pilgrims used as examples of peace, harmony, and thankfulness. However, while the Pilgrims' 1623 "way of thanksgiving" represents what we wish to infuse in Thanksgiving, Plymouth Colony before 1623 was closer to a Thanksgiving host's worst fears—resentments surface, harsh words are spoken, and people turn angry and unhappy with one another.

 

The Pilgrims' unhappiness was caused by their system of common property (not adopted, as often asserted, from their religious convictions, but required against their will by the colony's sponsors). The fruits of each person's efforts went to the community, and each received a share from the common wealth. This caused severe strains among the members, as Colony Governor William Bradford recorded:

 

" . . . the young men . . . did repine that they should spend their time and strength to work for other men's wives and children without any recompense. The strong . . . had not more in division . . . than he that was weak and not able to do a quarter the other could; this was thought injustice. The aged and graver men to be ranked and equalized in labors and victuals, clothes, etc . . . thought it some indignity and disrespect unto them. And the men's wives to be commanded to do service for other men, as dressing their meat, washing their clothes, etc., they deemed it a kind of slavery, neither could many husbands well brook it."

 

Bradford summarized the effects of their common property system:

 

"For this community of property (so far as it went) was found to breed much confusion and discontentment and retard much employment that would have been to their benefit and comfort . . . all being to have alike, and all to do alike . . . if it did not cut off those relations that God hath set amongst men, yet it did at least much diminish and take off the mutual respects that should be preserved amongst them."

 

How did the Pilgrims move from this dysfunctional system to the situation we try to emulate in our family gatherings? In the spring of 1623, they decided to let people produce for their own benefit:

 

"All their victuals were spent . . . no supply was heard of, neither knew they when they might expect any. So they began to think how they might raise as much corn as they could, and obtain a better crop than they had done, that they might not still thus languish in misery. At length . . . the Governor (with the advice of the chiefest among them) gave way that they should set corn every man for his own particular, and in that regard trust to themselves. . . . And so assigned to every family a parcel of land . . . "

 

The results were dramatic:

 

"This had very good success, for it made all hands very industrious, so as much more corn was planted than otherwise would have been by any means the Governor or any other could use, and saved him a great deal of trouble, and gave far better content. The women now went willingly into the field, and took their little ones with them to set corn, which before would allege weakness and inability, whom to have compelled would have been thought great tyranny and oppression."

 

That was quite a change from their previous situation, where severe whippings had been resorted to as an inducement to more labor effort, with little success other than in creating discontent.

 

Despite the Pilgrims' increased efforts in 1623, a summer drought threatened their crops. Following their beliefs, they offered contrition for their sins. Then the drought broke, which led to the Thanksgiving we still try to emulate. And as historian Russell Kirk reported, "never again were the Pilgrims short of food." It is appropriate to remember the Pilgrims as Americans celebrate Thanksgiving. Though we have incomparably more than they did, we can learn much from their "way of thanksgiving."

 

But we should also remember that our material blessings are the fruits of America's system of private property rights, whose power for peaceful and productive cooperation the Pilgrims began to prove by experiment almost four centuries ago, because those rights, and the freedoms and prosperity they entail, are under constant assault today.

 

------

 

Gary M. Galles is a professor of economics at Pepperdine University.

 

Nice message, Tom.

 

Happy Thanksgiving to ALL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't buy into the idea that a communal arrangement has to fail because everything from the Kibbutz movement to co-op housing to Mennonite colonies to seem to prosper.

 

That's because you are not an American rightie! They have vast and highly paid think tanks to modify history to their liking.

 

Yep, you are correct, those with a more Socialistic economy...Amish, Mennonites, Isrealis, Danes....even the Mormons (big time taxation - tithe) have prospered, while the dog eat dogs and the rat race have....well, created lots of dead dogs and live rats.

 

I guess if you like dogs and rats....this is a good thing. The a-hole who wrote that piece would probably have favored the sick and the dying and the ill children being cast out of camp...so more was available to the alpha dogs. In fact, why not eat the sick. Survival of the fittest. Actually, some did that during the French and Indian wars, but that was later on.

 

Does he mention that the Mayflower folks were beholder to a CORPORATION? Yes, under the gun to fork over back to their master investors in Britain.

 

My reading tells me that a lot of them died from disease...you know, that stuff that guys like Salk cured....in a Socialistic fashion (he never made a penny from it).

" U.S. president Franklin D. Roosevelt was the world's most recognized victim of the disease and founded the organization that would fund the development of a vaccine.Salk accepted an appointment and undertook a project funded by the National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis"

Tax money! He should be ashamed of himself.

 

And in a 100% Socialist statement, he said:

"When he was asked in a televised interview who owned the patent to the vaccine, Salk replied: "There is no patent. Could you patent the sun?"

 

Terrible man. Big Pharma could have really cleaned up on that polio thing! What a lost opportunity!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You really have to wonder about someone who can't stay on topic and on less than three totally unrelated WTF topics in a single post, don't you? Stream of unconciousness, anyone?

 

Anyway, Thanks, Tom. A good read.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Plymouth Colony was a bunch of hippies, and was eventually taken over by its more aggressive and expansive neighbor, the Massachusetts Bay Colony.

 

One of the factors in the success of the Bay Colony was effective zoning laws, which forced children to move out into the boonies to find new farmland. In the Plymouth Colony they just kept subdividing and subdividing, and the new generations got poorer and poorer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Property and the first Thanksgiving

 

At Thanksgiving, Americans reflect on their blessings and hope for uplifting family gatherings of togetherness and unity, with the Pilgrims used as examples of peace, harmony, and thankfulness. However, while the Pilgrims' 1623 "way of thanksgiving" represents what we wish to infuse in Thanksgiving, Plymouth Colony before 1623 was closer to a Thanksgiving host's worst fears—resentments surface, harsh words are spoken, and people turn angry and unhappy with one another.

 

The Pilgrims' unhappiness was caused by their system of common property (not adopted, as often asserted, from their religious convictions, but required against their will by the colony's sponsors). The fruits of each person's efforts went to the community, and each received a share from the common wealth. This caused severe strains among the members, as Colony Governor William Bradford recorded:

 

" . . . the young men . . . did repine that they should spend their time and strength to work for other men's wives and children without any recompense. The strong . . . had not more in division . . . than he that was weak and not able to do a quarter the other could; this was thought injustice. The aged and graver men to be ranked and equalized in labors and victuals, clothes, etc . . . thought it some indignity and disrespect unto them. And the men's wives to be commanded to do service for other men, as dressing their meat, washing their clothes, etc., they deemed it a kind of slavery, neither could many husbands well brook it."

 

Bradford summarized the effects of their common property system:

 

"For this community of property (so far as it went) was found to breed much confusion and discontentment and retard much employment that would have been to their benefit and comfort . . . all being to have alike, and all to do alike . . . if it did not cut off those relations that God hath set amongst men, yet it did at least much diminish and take off the mutual respects that should be preserved amongst them."

 

How did the Pilgrims move from this dysfunctional system to the situation we try to emulate in our family gatherings? In the spring of 1623, they decided to let people produce for their own benefit:

 

"All their victuals were spent . . . no supply was heard of, neither knew they when they might expect any. So they began to think how they might raise as much corn as they could, and obtain a better crop than they had done, that they might not still thus languish in misery. At length . . . the Governor (with the advice of the chiefest among them) gave way that they should set corn every man for his own particular, and in that regard trust to themselves. . . . And so assigned to every family a parcel of land . . . "

 

The results were dramatic:

 

"This had very good success, for it made all hands very industrious, so as much more corn was planted than otherwise would have been by any means the Governor or any other could use, and saved him a great deal of trouble, and gave far better content. The women now went willingly into the field, and took their little ones with them to set corn, which before would allege weakness and inability, whom to have compelled would have been thought great tyranny and oppression."

 

That was quite a change from their previous situation, where severe whippings had been resorted to as an inducement to more labor effort, with little success other than in creating discontent.

 

Despite the Pilgrims' increased efforts in 1623, a summer drought threatened their crops. Following their beliefs, they offered contrition for their sins. Then the drought broke, which led to the Thanksgiving we still try to emulate. And as historian Russell Kirk reported, "never again were the Pilgrims short of food." It is appropriate to remember the Pilgrims as Americans celebrate Thanksgiving. Though we have incomparably more than they did, we can learn much from their "way of thanksgiving."

 

But we should also remember that our material blessings are the fruits of America's system of private property rights, whose power for peaceful and productive cooperation the Pilgrims began to prove by experiment almost four centuries ago, because those rights, and the freedoms and prosperity they entail, are under constant assault today.

 

------

 

Gary M. Galles is a professor of economics at Pepperdine University.

 

Nice message, Tom.

 

Happy Thanksgiving to ALL.

 

 

Video version. Enjoy.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That was 2009, and people come to PA to have nerves touched.

 

smileycowGene.jpg

Some things have not changed in the last couple of years.

 

Happy Thanksgiving to all my Republican and conservative bretheren. Let us give thanks that we weren't born godless socialist democRATS like the pilgrims.

 

To all of you liberal national socialist democRATS who think that Thanksgiving is a time not to exacerbate divisions between us, and that there was only one poster who would turn a holiday like Thanksgiving into a political statement, GFY, the Americans are celebrating today.

Touched a nerve here Tom.

Perhaps everyone else will have forgotten the tenor of our national discourse in November of 2009, and the efforts to divide the American people, but I haven't. I recall being caught up in the frenzy of Socialists trying to take our country from us via our healthcare system, and that a grassroots group of True Patriots were there to spread the good word and save us from repeating our collectivist errors. I appreciated and appreciate the history provided by Tom's story, and now that our national dialogue is so much more civil and Americans are back in (some) power, I am far more subdued. I wouldn't think of telling democRATS "GFY" on this fine day in 2011. I invite all democRATS to join with Americans and celebrate Thanksgiving and the bounty that we all share I f-ing EARNED (but am willing to share because of the holiday).

Your divisive democRATS vs Americans shit was mildly amusing at first but is wearing thin. You need some new material.

I guess I touched a nerve here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That was 2009, and people come to PA to have nerves touched.

 

smileycowGene.jpg

Some things have not changed in the last couple of years.

 

Perhaps everyone else will have forgotten the tenor of our national discourse in November of 2009, and the efforts to divide the American people, but I haven't. I recall being caught up in the frenzy of Socialists trying to take our country from us via our healthcare system, and that a grassroots group of True Patriots were there to spread the good word and save us from repeating our collectivist errors. I appreciated and appreciate the history provided by Tom's story, and now that our national dialogue is so much more civil and Americans are back in (some) power, I am far more subdued. I wouldn't think of telling democRATS "GFY" on this fine day in 2011. I invite all democRATS to join with Americans and celebrate Thanksgiving and the bounty that we all share I f-ing EARNED (but am willing to share because of the holiday).

Your divisive democRATS vs Americans shit was mildly amusing at first but is wearing thin. You need some new material.

I guess I touched a nerve here.

Yeah…divisiveness by satire is still divisiveness and I don’t appreciate it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah…divisiveness by satire is still divisiveness and I don’t appreciate it.

And calling a racist a racist is racist. It is an entertaining fallacy when Rush does it, but it doesn't transfer to this context with the same panache.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Some things have not changed in the last couple of years.

 

 

That's true. I was happy to provide a little history lesson back then, and I still like the thread this year.

 

It's pretty likely I will still like it at this time next year. See ya back here then!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Some things have not changed in the last couple of years.

 

 

That's true. I was happy to provide a little history lesson back then, and I still like the thread this year.

 

It's pretty likely I will still like it at this time next year. See ya back here then!

 

A good story is always entertaining.

 

I will be there to present a link to a discussion of the non fiction version.

“Across the political spectrum, there’s a tendency to grab a hold of some historical incident and yoke it to a current agenda,” he said. “It doesn’t always mean there’s no connection, but often things are presented as historical first, rather than as part of the agenda first.”

 

But Thanksgiving is about togetherness, so I will also encourage all Americans to celebrate Thanksgiving.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

A good story is always entertaining.

 

I will be there to present a link to a discussion of the non fiction version.

 

 

Flaps15 already linked to Bradford's actual log, which is really more informative than the NY Times' (or the libertarians') spin.

 

Good stuff. While I've been aware of the actual history of the landing and settlement for a number of years now since reading Bradford's Log, it was good to take in the three refreshers you posted above. Thanks for that, the message and Happy Thanksgiving.

 

For those interested in trying to decipher Bradford's Olde English, the relevant stuff starts around page 134 in that book, which you can read online at flaps15's link.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some things have not changed in the last couple of years.

 

 

That's true. I was happy to provide a little history lesson back then, and I still like the thread this year.

 

It's pretty likely I will still like it at this time next year. See ya back here then!

 

A good story is always entertaining.

 

I will be there to present a link to a discussion of the non fiction version.

"Across the political spectrum, there's a tendency to grab a hold of some historical incident and yoke it to a current agenda," he said. "It doesn't always mean there's no connection, but often things are presented as historical first, rather than as part of the agenda first."

 

But Thanksgiving is about togetherness, so I will also encourage all Americans to celebrate Thanksgiving.

 

Interesting counterpoint, Sol!!??

 

"But historians dispute the characterization of the colony as a collectivist society. “To call it socialism is wildly inaccurate,” said Karen Ordahl Kupperman, a historian at New York University and the author of “The Jamestown Project.” “It was a contracted company, and everybody worked for the company. I mean, is Halliburton a socialist scheme?” "

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Interesting counterpoint, Sol!!??

 

"But historians dispute the characterization of the colony as a collectivist society. "To call it socialism is wildly inaccurate," said Karen Ordahl Kupperman, a historian at New York University and the author of "The Jamestown Project." "It was a contracted company, and everybody worked for the company. I mean, is Halliburton a socialist scheme?" "

 

Jamestown was indentured labor. The colonists there were effectively slave. Most died, but those who didn't were told that if they didn't work hard, they'd be shot or hung. There was nothing glorious about it.

 

In fact, they never even intended to earn their own living. It was thought that they would be able to live by finding GOLD and stealing from the Indians, so they didn't plant enough stuff. They ended up starving.

 

Was not a pretty scene.

 

"The first joint-stock company to launch a lasting venture to the New World was the Virginia Company of London. The investors had one goal in mind: gold. They hoped to repeat the success of Spaniards who found gold in South America."

 

"The colonists were told that if they did not generate any wealth, financial support for their efforts would end. Many of the men spent their days vainly searching for gold. As a consequence, the colonists spent little time farming. Food supplies dwindled. Malaria and the harsh winter besieged the colonists, as well. After the first year, only 38 of the original 144 had survived."

 

According to our GOP friends, this is perhaps the model we all should follow for modern life also. Corporate control and survival of whoever can beat the next guy over the head and take his stuff.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One aspect of the story that I've always found interesting was the question of "why did the Indians help the Pilgrims?" The answer to that single question puts a lot of the situation into it's perspective. I find it interesting because, typically, most people tend to treat the native Americans as objects, and not actual people. They just helped because the pilgrims needed it right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One aspect of the story that I've always found interesting was the question of "why did the Indians help the Pilgrims?" The answer to that single question puts a lot of the situation into it's perspective. I find it interesting because, typically, most people tend to treat the native Americans as objects, and not actual people. They just helped because the pilgrims needed it right?

 

 

The Indians beleived in progressive policy towards their fellow man. The white man over the ensuing years proved their basic regressiveness in killing off, then imprisoning the red man. The red man also beleived in spirits being in the land and its' bounty, whereas the white man beleived in their one god. I think the Indians had it right...:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Indians were doing what any human would do - they feared and respected the invaders. They made alliances before their enemies could make the same alliances, etc.

 

They may have been close to Mother Nature, but the tribal and survival rules still applied.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

A good story is always entertaining.

 

I will be there to present a link to a discussion of the non fiction version.

 

 

In one common telling, the pilgrims who came to Plymouth established a communal system, where all had to pool whatever they hunted or grew on their lands. Because they could not reap the fruits of their labors, no one had any incentive to work, and the system failed — confusion, thievery and famine ensued.

 

Um yeah. I recognize that one. That would be Governor Bradford's telling of events, which is commonly used because, well, he was there and recorded the events.

 

"The experience that was had in this commone course and condition, tired sundrie years, and that amongst godly and sober men, may well evince the vanitie of that conceite of Platos and other ancients, applauded by some of later times; --that the taking away of propertie, and bringing in communitie into a comone wealth would make them happy and florishing; as if they were wiser than God. For this comunitie (so farr as it was) was found to breed much confusion and discontente, and retard much imployment that would have been to their benefite and comforte. For the yong-men that were most able and fitte for labour and service did repine that they should spend their time and streingth to worke for other mens wives and children, with out any recompense. The strong, or man of parts, had no more in divission of victails and cloaths, than he that was weake and not able to doe a quarter the other could; this was thought injustice. The aged and graver men to be ranked and equalised in labours, and victuals, cloaths, etc., with the meaner and younger sorte, thought it some indignite and disrespect unto them. And for men's wives to be commanded to doe service for other men, as dresing their meate, washing their cloaths, etc., they deemed it a kind of slavery, neither could many husbands well brooke it.

 

...

 

So they [the pilgims] begane to thinke how they might raise as much corne as they could, and obtaine a beter crope than they had done, that they might not still thus languish in miserie. At length after much debate of things, the Gov. (with the advise of the cheefest amongest them) gave way that they should set downe every man for his owne perticuler, and in that regard trust to themselves... And so assigned to every family a parceel of land. This had very good success; for it made all hands very industrious, so as much more corne was planted than other waise would have bene by any means the Gov. or any other could use, and saved him a great deall of trouble, and gave farr better contente. The women now wente willingly into the feild, and tooke their litle-ons with them to set corne, which before would aledge weakness, and inabilitie; whom to have compelled would have bene thought great tiranie and opression."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Indians were doing what any human would do - they feared and respected the invaders. They made alliances before their enemies could make the same alliances, etc.

 

They may have been close to Mother Nature, but the tribal and survival rules still applied.....

 

 

Hold your friends close, and your enemies closer!!B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

A good story is always entertaining.

 

I will be there to present a link to a discussion of the non fiction version.

 

 

In one common telling, the pilgrims who came to Plymouth established a communal system, where all had to pool whatever they hunted or grew on their lands. Because they could not reap the fruits of their labors, no one had any incentive to work, and the system failed — confusion, thievery and famine ensued.

 

Um yeah. I recognize that one. That would be Governor Bradford's telling of events, which is commonly used because, well, he was there and recorded the events.

 

"The experience that was had in this commone course and condition, tired sundrie years, and that amongst godly and sober men, may well evince the vanitie of that conceite of Platos and other ancients, applauded by some of later times; --that the taking away of propertie, and bringing in communitie into a comone wealth would make them happy and florishing; as if they were wiser than God. For this comunitie (so farr as it was) was found to breed much confusion and discontente, and retard much imployment that would have been to their benefite and comforte. For the yong-men that were most able and fitte for labour and service did repine that they should spend their time and streingth to worke for other mens wives and children, with out any recompense. The strong, or man of parts, had no more in divission of victails and cloaths, than he that was weake and not able to doe a quarter the other could; this was thought injustice. The aged and graver men to be ranked and equalised in labours, and victuals, cloaths, etc., with the meaner and younger sorte, thought it some indignite and disrespect unto them. And for men's wives to be commanded to doe service for other men, as dresing their meate, washing their cloaths, etc., they deemed it a kind of slavery, neither could many husbands well brooke it.

 

...

 

So they [the pilgims] begane to thinke how they might raise as much corne as they could, and obtaine a beter crope than they had done, that they might not still thus languish in miserie. At length after much debate of things, the Gov. (with the advise of the cheefest amongest them) gave way that they should set downe every man for his owne perticuler, and in that regard trust to themselves... And so assigned to every family a parceel of land. This had very good success; for it made all hands very industrious, so as much more corne was planted than other waise would have bene by any means the Gov. or any other could use, and saved him a great deall of trouble, and gave farr better contente. The women now wente willingly into the feild, and tooke their litle-ons with them to set corne, which before would aledge weakness, and inabilitie; whom to have compelled would have bene thought great tiranie and opression."

Gov. Bradford’s account is very um…inconvenient and politically incorrect so it was rectified.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has anyone ever seen Bradford and Snagglepuss in the same place? Just askin'.

 

:lol: Bradford is his only companion petition!

 

fixed for you...:lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obama omits God

 

 

And then there is Thanksgiving in the Obama White House. Allah Akbar!

 

 

Seperati0n of church and state.

 

Agnostics and Atheists unite now!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

A good story is always entertaining.

 

I will be there to present a link to a discussion of the non fiction version.

 

 

In one common telling, the pilgrims who came to Plymouth established a communal system, where all had to pool whatever they hunted or grew on their lands. Because they could not reap the fruits of their labors, no one had any incentive to work, and the system failed — confusion, thievery and famine ensued.

 

Um yeah. I recognize that one. That would be Governor Bradford's telling of events, which is commonly used because, well, he was there and recorded the events.

 

"The experience that was had in this commone course and condition, tired sundrie years, and that amongst godly and sober men, may well evince the vanitie of that conceite of Platos and other ancients, applauded by some of later times; --that the taking away of propertie, and bringing in communitie into a comone wealth would make them happy and florishing; as if they were wiser than God. For this comunitie (so farr as it was) was found to breed much confusion and discontente, and retard much imployment that would have been to their benefite and comforte. For the yong-men that were most able and fitte for labour and service did repine that they should spend their time and streingth to worke for other mens wives and children, with out any recompense. The strong, or man of parts, had no more in divission of victails and cloaths, than he that was weake and not able to doe a quarter the other could; this was thought injustice. The aged and graver men to be ranked and equalised in labours, and victuals, cloaths, etc., with the meaner and younger sorte, thought it some indignite and disrespect unto them. And for men's wives to be commanded to doe service for other men, as dresing their meate, washing their cloaths, etc., they deemed it a kind of slavery, neither could many husbands well brooke it.

 

...

 

So they [the pilgims] begane to thinke how they might raise as much corne as they could, and obtaine a beter crope than they had done, that they might not still thus languish in miserie. At length after much debate of things, the Gov. (with the advise of the cheefest amongest them) gave way that they should set downe every man for his owne perticuler, and in that regard trust to themselves... And so assigned to every family a parceel of land. This had very good success; for it made all hands very industrious, so as much more corne was planted than other waise would have bene by any means the Gov. or any other could use, and saved him a great deall of trouble, and gave farr better contente. The women now wente willingly into the feild, and tooke their litle-ons with them to set corne, which before would aledge weakness, and inabilitie; whom to have compelled would have bene thought great tiranie and opression."

Gov. Bradford’s account is very um…inconvenient and politically incorrect so it was rectified.

How so, specifically?

 

 

So giving everyone 40 acres and a mule is Capitalism?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So giving everyone 40 acres and a mule is Capitalism?

 

 

Sounds kind of socialisitical to me??:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So giving everyone 40 acres and a mule is Capitalism?

 

 

Sounds kind of socialisitical to me??:)

 

Yes, keeping all the acreage and all the mules as common property was definitely more capitalist and less socialist. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In one common telling, the pilgrims who came to Plymouth established a communal system, where all had to pool whatever they hunted or grew on their lands. Because they could not reap the fruits of their labors, no one had any incentive to work, and the system failed — confusion, thievery and famine ensued.

 

Um yeah. I recognize that one. That would be Governor Bradford's telling of events, which is commonly used because, well, he was there and recorded the events.

 

"The experience that was had in this commone course and condition, tired sundrie years, and that amongst godly and sober men, may well evince the vanitie of that conceite of Platos and other ancients, applauded by some of later times; --that the taking away of propertie, and bringing in communitie into a comone wealth would make them happy and florishing; as if they were wiser than God. For this comunitie (so farr as it was) was found to breed much confusion and discontente, and retard much imployment that would have been to their benefite and comforte. For the yong-men that were most able and fitte for labour and service did repine that they should spend their time and streingth to worke for other mens wives and children, with out any recompense. The strong, or man of parts, had no more in divission of victails and cloaths, than he that was weake and not able to doe a quarter the other could; this was thought injustice. The aged and graver men to be ranked and equalised in labours, and victuals, cloaths, etc., with the meaner and younger sorte, thought it some indignite and disrespect unto them. And for men's wives to be commanded to doe service for other men, as dresing their meate, washing their cloaths, etc., they deemed it a kind of slavery, neither could many husbands well brooke it.

 

...

 

So they [the pilgims] begane to thinke how they might raise as much corne as they could, and obtaine a beter crope than they had done, that they might not still thus languish in miserie. At length after much debate of things, the Gov. (with the advise of the cheefest amongest them) gave way that they should set downe every man for his owne perticuler, and in that regard trust to themselves... And so assigned to every family a parceel of land. This had very good success; for it made all hands very industrious, so as much more corne was planted than other waise would have bene by any means the Gov. or any other could use, and saved him a great deall of trouble, and gave farr better contente. The women now wente willingly into the feild, and tooke their litle-ons with them to set corne, which before would aledge weakness, and inabilitie; whom to have compelled would have bene thought great tiranie and opression."

Gov. Bradford’s account is very um…inconvenient and politically incorrect so it was rectified.

How so, specifically?

 

 

So giving everyone 40 acres and a mule is Capitalism?

What is governmental control of the means of production called? You should know this one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a descendant of a couple who met on the Mayflower, the endless re-arranging of their experience to fit current-day politics is always amusing.

Long story short, separating work from reward didn't work for them OR the Jamestown crew, but the solutions were very different.

Massachusetts: Want food - grow it.

Virginia: If I don't see your ass out here working the fields, you are going to sit and watch the rest of us eat or I'll sell you to the Indians so they can have a white rent-boy. Your choice :o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, keeping all the acreage and all the mules as common property was definitely more capitalist and less socialist. :rolleyes:

 

Someone correct me here!

The 40 acres and a mule were a reward for black folks in the south - promised by Sherman after he kicked ass....for black freemen or maybe those who served?

 

In other words, it was a liberal socialist yankee redistribution welfare-king thing from day one......

 

Now, having the KING grant white dude stuff..like ALL of Pennsylvania, etc.....THAT was capitalism.

 

See the difference? One you can fuck the black dudes on (they took back most of those promises, and even then the racists down there ruined it for those who did get the land).......and the other one, they named a state, a university and many more things after him (William Penn, in this case).......

 

There is clearly a difference here. Land gained by machine gunning the natives is capitalism. Land given to poor individuals is socialism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a descendant of a couple who met on the Mayflower, the endless re-arranging of their experience to fit current-day politics is always amusing.

Long story short, separating work from reward didn't work for them OR the Jamestown crew, but the solutions were very different.

 

 

Massachusetts: Want food - grow it.

 

Hmmm...they didn't tell you about stealing the Indians stash of corn? Go back and read it again!

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

What is governmental control of the means of production called? You should know this one.

You did not answer the questions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

What is governmental control of the means of production called? You should know this one.

You did not answer the questions.

I don't have to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know all about that, but it wasn't enough and eventually you run out of people who don't guard their food.

 

As a descendant of a couple who met on the Mayflower, the endless re-arranging of their experience to fit current-day politics is always amusing.

Long story short, separating work from reward didn't work for them OR the Jamestown crew, but the solutions were very different.

 

 

Massachusetts: Want food - grow it.

 

Hmmm...they didn't tell you about stealing the Indians stash of corn? Go back and read it again!

 

William Penn was lacking in machine guns or any other full-auto weapon. Just sayin ;)

 

Yes, keeping all the acreage and all the mules as common property was definitely more capitalist and less socialist. :rolleyes:

 

Someone correct me here!

The 40 acres and a mule were a reward for black folks in the south - promised by Sherman after he kicked ass....for black freemen or maybe those who served?

 

In other words, it was a liberal socialist yankee redistribution welfare-king thing from day one......

 

Now, having the KING grant white dude stuff..like ALL of Pennsylvania, etc.....THAT was capitalism.

 

See the difference? One you can fuck the black dudes on (they took back most of those promises, and even then the racists down there ruined it for those who did get the land).......and the other one, they named a state, a university and many more things after him (William Penn, in this case).......

 

There is clearly a difference here. Land gained by machine gunning the natives is capitalism. Land given to poor individuals is socialism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

William Penn was lacking in machine guns or any other full-auto weapon. Just sayin ;)

 

 

You got me there!

I'm talking about the same dudes, the Brits, once Hiram invented the thing. They went to Africa and "capitalized" all the folks there by mowing them down and being entertained by it.

 

They then installed more capitalism to the area. Ask Milo or Newt. They both seem to be experts on African history.

wink.gif

 

"The Maxim gun was first used by Britain's colonial forces in the 1893-1894 First Matabele War in Rhodesia. During the Battle of the Shangani, 50 soldiers fought off 5,000 warriors with just four Maxim guns"

or

http://en.wikipedia....tle_of_Omdurman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Happy Thanksgiving everyone, and let's all be thankful for spellcheck!

 

"The experience that was had in this commone course and condition, tired sundrie years, and that amongst godly and sober men, may well evince the vanitie of that conceite of Platos and other ancients, applauded by some of later times; --that the taking away of propertie, and bringing in communitie into a comone wealth would make them happy and florishing; as if they were wiser than God. For this comunitie (so farr as it was) was found to breed much confusion and discontente, and retard much imployment that would have been to their benefite and comforte. For the yong-men that were most able and fitte for labour and service did repine that they should spend their time and streingth to worke for other mens wives and children, with out any recompense. The strong, or man of parts, had no more in divission of victails and cloaths, than he that was weake and not able to doe a quarter the other could; this was thought injustice. The aged and graver men to be ranked and equalised in labours, and victuals, cloaths, etc., with the meaner and younger sorte, thought it some indignite and disrespect unto them. And for men's wives to be commanded to doe service for other men, as dresing their meate, washing their cloaths, etc., they deemed it a kind of slavery, neither could many husbands well brooke it.

 

...

 

So they [the pilgims] begane to thinke how they might raise as much corne as they could, and obtaine a beter crope than they had done, that they might not still thus languish in miserie. At length after much debate of things, the Gov. (with the advise of the cheefest amongest them) gave way that they should set downe every man for his owne perticuler, and in that regard trust to themselves... And so assigned to every family a parceel of land. This had very good success; for it made all hands very industrious, so as much more corne was planted than other waise would have bene by any means the Gov. or any other could use, and saved him a great deall of trouble, and gave farr better contente. The women now wente willingly into the feild, and tooke their litle-ons with them to set corne, which before would aledge weakness, and inabilitie; whom to have compelled would have bene thought great tiranie and opression."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Giving thanks for the 'invisible hand'

by Jeff Jacoby

The Boston Globe

Today, in millions of homes across the nation, God will be thanked for many gifts -- for the feast on the table and the company of loved ones, for health and good fortune in the year gone by, for peace at home in a time of war, for the incalculable privilege of having been born -- or having become -- American.
But it probably won't occur to too many of us to give thanks for the fact that the local supermarket had plenty of turkey for sale this week. Even the devout aren't likely to thank God for airline schedules that made it possible for some of those loved ones to fly home for Thanksgiving. Or for that great cranberry-apple pie recipe in the food section of the newspaper.
Those things we take more or less for granted. It hardly takes a miracle to explain why grocery stores stock up on turkey before Thanksgiving, or why Hollywood releases big movies in time for big holidays. That's what they do. Where is God in that?
And yet, isn't there something wondrous -- something almost inexplicable -- in the way your Thanksgiving weekend is made possible by the skill and labor of vast numbers of total strangers?
To bring that turkey to the dining room table, for example, required the efforts of thousands of people -- the poultry farmers who raised the birds, of course, but also the feed distributors who supplied their nourishment and the truckers who brought it to the farm, not to mention the architect who designed the hatchery, the workmen who built it, and the technicians who keep it running. The bird had to be slaughtered and defeathered and inspected and transported and unloaded and wrapped and priced and displayed. The people who accomplished those tasks were supported in turn by armies of other people accomplishing other tasks -- from refining the gasoline that fueled the trucks to manufacturing the plastic in which the meat was packaged.
The activities of countless far-flung men and women over the course of many months had to be intricately choreographed and precisely timed, so that when you showed up to buy a fresh Thanksgiving turkey, there would be one -- or more likely, a few dozen -- waiting. The level of coordination that was required to pull it off is mind-boggling. But what is even more mind-boggling is this: No one coordinated it.
No turkey czar sat in a command post somewhere, consulting a master plan and issuing orders. No one rode herd on all those people, forcing them to cooperate for your benefit. And yet they did cooperate. When you arrived at the supermarket, your turkey was there. You didn't have to do anything but show up to buy it. If that isn't a miracle, what should we call it?

http://www.jeffjacoby.com/8393/giving-thanks-for-the-invisible-hand

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a good one, craker.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cute cartoon, but I will get real history from the Governor of the colony instead, thanks.

Yes, silly me. Never question authority, always trust the leader.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Giving thanks for the 'invisible hand'

by Jeff Jacoby

The Boston Globe

Today, in millions of homes across the nation, God will be thanked for many gifts -- for the feast on the table and the company of loved ones, for health and good fortune in the year gone by, for peace at home in a time of war, for the incalculable privilege of having been born -- or having become -- American.
But it probably won't occur to too many of us to give thanks for the fact that the local supermarket had plenty of turkey for sale this week. Even the devout aren't likely to thank God for airline schedules that made it possible for some of those loved ones to fly home for Thanksgiving. Or for that great cranberry-apple pie recipe in the food section of the newspaper.
Those things we take more or less for granted. It hardly takes a miracle to explain why grocery stores stock up on turkey before Thanksgiving, or why Hollywood releases big movies in time for big holidays. That's what they do. Where is God in that?
And yet, isn't there something wondrous -- something almost inexplicable -- in the way your Thanksgiving weekend is made possible by the skill and labor of vast numbers of total strangers?
To bring that turkey to the dining room table, for example, required the efforts of thousands of people -- the poultry farmers who raised the birds, of course, but also the feed distributors who supplied their nourishment and the truckers who brought it to the farm, not to mention the architect who designed the hatchery, the workmen who built it, and the technicians who keep it running. The bird had to be slaughtered and defeathered and inspected and transported and unloaded and wrapped and priced and displayed. The people who accomplished those tasks were supported in turn by armies of other people accomplishing other tasks -- from refining the gasoline that fueled the trucks to manufacturing the plastic in which the meat was packaged.
The activities of countless far-flung men and women over the course of many months had to be intricately choreographed and precisely timed, so that when you showed up to buy a fresh Thanksgiving turkey, there would be one -- or more likely, a few dozen -- waiting. The level of coordination that was required to pull it off is mind-boggling. But what is even more mind-boggling is this: No one coordinated it.
No turkey czar sat in a command post somewhere, consulting a master plan and issuing orders. No one rode herd on all those people, forcing them to cooperate for your benefit. And yet they did cooperate. When you arrived at the supermarket, your turkey was there. You didn't have to do anything but show up to buy it. If that isn't a miracle, what should we call it?

http://www.jeffjacoby.com/8393/giving-thanks-for-the-invisible-hand

It's funny, but Obama said basically the same thing, and he was vilified for it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Happy Thanksgiving, sailors. It's going to be a strange one for our family. Probably won't involve a turkey, certainly not the usual one with teriyaki sauce on the charcoal rotisserie grill that my dad got out of a trashpile long ago. But we have much to be thankful for. As usual, property rights are among those things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Libertarian Mythology and American History

 

...I am not saying that if early Americans could have been seen today's America, they would have been pleased. Some clearly would not have been. I am saying that what they favored—national and commercial greatness—prepared the way for what America has become, whether or they would have favored it. If you will the end, you will the means. You cannot build a continental empire and a worldwide political and military presence without planting the seeds of powerful government at home, a national-security state, and all that they require, including income taxation, regulation, central banking, and a welfare state to ameliorate the worst hardships of the system’s victims, if only to tamp down radical resistance....

 

 

Yeah, I know Turkey Day is a long way off in either direction, but it's a good article.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Libertarian Mythology and American History

 

...I am not saying that if early Americans could have been seen today's America, they would have been pleased. Some clearly would not have been. I am saying that what they favored—national and commercial greatness—prepared the way for what America has become, whether or they would have favored it. If you will the end, you will the means. You cannot build a continental empire and a worldwide political and military presence without planting the seeds of powerful government at home, a national-security state, and all that they require, including income taxation, regulation, central banking, and a welfare state to ameliorate the worst hardships of the system’s victims, if only to tamp down radical resistance....

 

 

Yeah, I know Turkey Day is a long way off in either direction, but it's a good article.

 

Interesting article, Tom.

 

Practice often falls short of theory, and ideas evolve. Austrian economics rests on the foundation laid by Adam Smith (1776) and other classical liberals. America and modern libertarian ideas share the same heritage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My cousin is an excellent cook and her husband is a good hunter. We're going to their hunting ranch today, so I expect there will be a great deal to be thankful for, most of it completely free-range and organic. Look at me being a greeny weenie!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites