The Real Story of Thanksgiving

Discussion in 'Science & History' started by Truth-Bringer, Nov 23, 2007.

  1. [SIZE=+2]The Real Story Behind Thanksgiving[/SIZE]

    Did you know that the first [Plymouth Colony Pilgrim's] Thanksgiving was a celebration of the triumph of private property and individual initiative?

    William Bradford was the governor of the original Pilgrim colony, founded at Plymouth in 1621. The colony was first organized on a communal basis, as their financiers required. Land was owned in common. The Pilgrims farmed communally, too, following the "from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs" precept.

    The results were disastrous. Communism didn't work any better 400 years ago than it does today. By 1623, the colony had suffered serious losses. Starvation was imminent.

    Bradford realized that the communal system encouraged and rewarded waste and laziness and inefficiency, and destroyed individual initiative. Desperate, he abolished it. He distributed private plots of land among the surviving Pilgrims, encouraging them to plant early and farm as individuals, not collectively.

    The results: a bountiful early harvest that saved the colonies. After the harvest, the Pilgrims celebrated with a day of Thanksgiving -- on August 9th.

    Unfortunately, William Bradford's diaries -- in which he recorded the failure of the collectivist system and the triumph of private enterprise -- were lost for many years. When Thanksgiving was later made a national holiday, the present November date was chosen. And the lesson the Pilgrims so painfully learned was, alas, not made a part of the holiday.

    Happily, Bradford's diaries were later rediscovered. They're available today in paperback. They tell the real story of Thanksgiving -- how private property and individual initiative saved the Pilgrims.

    This Thanksgiving season, one of the many things I'm thankful for is our free market system (imperfectly realized as it is). And I'm also grateful that there are increasing numbers of Americans who are learning the importance of free markets, and who are working to replace government coercion with marketplace cooperation here in America and around the world.

    Paul Schmidt


    And there you have it - the real story of Thanksgiving - Collectivism fails yet again. Another experiment proving the truth.


  2. ExpectantlyIronic

    ExpectantlyIronic e̳̳̺͕ͬ̓̑̂ͮͦͣ͒͒h̙ͦ̔͂?̅̂ ̾͗̑

    The Pilgrims celebrated the 1623 "Thanksgiving" because they were happy that it rained and that a ship with more colonists and supplies was on its way. It was a day of prayer as opposed to a harvest festival. The 1621 "Thanksgiving" was a harvest festival (more-or-less), and was what we all learned about in history class.

    Source here.
    More here.
  3. Yes - from the collectivist statist viewpoint - which is the only viewpoint you'll get in the government schools...

    I guess they missed it too:

    "Happily, Bradford's diaries were later rediscovered."
  4. cloud 9

    cloud 9 Guest

    whoever takes the time to read all of that is a dick!!!!!
  5. ExpectantlyIronic

    ExpectantlyIronic e̳̳̺͕ͬ̓̑̂ͮͦͣ͒͒h̙ͦ̔͂?̅̂ ̾͗̑

    ... and published in 1856 under the title "Of Plymouth Plantation". The Research Manager of Plimoth Plantation would be well aware of it. As would, one can imagine, the folks who work at the Pilgrim Hall Musuem. In fact, I'm pretty sure it's what is called "Bradford's history" in the first article I posted, which quotes such.
  6. danielpalos

    danielpalos Guest

    Can you post some other examples of how you reached your conclusion?

    Socialism worked pretty well for the aboriginal Americans for millenia before the Pilgrims arrived.

    I think the only major problem with communism today, was that the former Soviets fell for the useless rhetoric and propaganda that the US is still issueing, even though the Cold War no longer exists.

    What if, the Soviets had ignored Western Capitalist Imperialism and devoted their energies to industrial automation? They beat us in the space race. What if they had had no shortages of consumables and their populace enjoyed more leisure as a result?

  7. ExpectantlyIronic

    ExpectantlyIronic e̳̳̺͕ͬ̓̑̂ͮͦͣ͒͒h̙ͦ̔͂?̅̂ ̾͗̑

    Technically, the natives would have had a traditional economy, as opposed to a socialist one.

    The Soviet Union focused too much on industry, whereas they should have focused more on agriculture. At least, then, there would have been no worries of food shortages. The big problem with communism is that it involves a whole lot of guesswork on the part of those in charge, as to what should be produced (and even then, people don't have sufficient incentive to improve production). Whereas, in a mixed or market economy, the market just takes care of that.
  8. danielpalos

    danielpalos Guest

    Why would the aboriginal Americans have had a traditonal economy? They didn't use currency, and many had communal facilities.

    Hunting and war parties were not, to my understanding, paid on an indidivual basis; nor, was there the concept of private property or private property rights as we know them to exist in capitalist economies.

    I can agree with you on market principles. But agriculture was probably not as modernized as the military and the Soviets did beat us in the space race via socialism. Our own, US, space race was also the result of socialism and not the efforts of the market.

  9. ExpectantlyIronic

    ExpectantlyIronic e̳̳̺͕ͬ̓̑̂ͮͦͣ͒͒h̙ͦ̔͂?̅̂ ̾͗̑

    I wasn't all that clear. I meant a traditional economy as the term is defined in opposition to planned, market, and other economic systems. I didn't mean it to represent what we would think of as a traditional modern economy.

    Which is why I tend to advocate a mixed economy. Neither Somalia nor the Soviet Union strike me as great models for a nation to mimic. Mixed economies, on the other hand, seem to have a pretty good track record, and makes the most sense to me when I consider such matters.
  10. danielpalos

    danielpalos Guest

    You make a good point. I must have have been stereotyping along my train of thought. I understand that socialism, as we understand the modern sense of the word, is not what the aboriginal Americans had. However, my view of socialism places a greater emphasis on collective action without a corresponding form of "individual contract" most commonly used in capitalistic ecomomies.

    It may not be the equivalent to even Puritan levels of socialism (via communalism) but, in my opinion such an economy would have more to do with socialism than with capitalism as we understand it.

    I don't think we are advanced enough to have better forms of socialism. Maybe when we invent the transporter and replicators, we may have a better method of providing for everyone, with less emphasis on modern capitalism that only makes somewhat efficient use of resources. Secular communism could eventually do what Divine communism has only done in literature. Manna from the public sector could be a reality on Earth with modern technology.

Share This Page