(edit title) Socialism killed 50% of the pilgrims Options

[Mike]

http://www.mises.org/story/336

The problem with this official story 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. They preferred instead to steal food. He says the colony was riddled with "corruption," and with "confusion and discontent." The crops were small because "much was stolen both by night and day, before it became scarce eatable."

In the harvest feasts of 1621 and 1622, "all had their hungry bellies filled," but only briefly. The prevailing condition during those years was not the abundance the official story claims, it was famine and death. The first "Thanksgiving" was not so much a celebration as it was the last meal of condemned men.

But in subsequent years something changes. The harvest of 1623 was different. Suddenly, "instead of famine now God gave them plenty," Bradford wrote, "and the face of things was changed, to the rejoicing of the hearts of many, for which they blessed God." Thereafter, he wrote, "any general want or famine hath not been amongst them since to this day." In fact, in 1624, so much food was produced that the colonists were able to begin exporting corn.

What 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." They began to question their form of economic organization.

This 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.

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. Bradford writes that "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." Also, "the strong, or man of parts, had no more in division of victuals and clothes, than he that was weak." So the young and strong refused to work and the total amount of food produced was never adequate.

To rectify this situation, in 1623 Bradford abolished socialism. He gave each household a parcel of land and told them they could keep what they produced, or trade it away as they saw fit. In other words, he replaced socialism with a free market, and that was the end of famines.

Many early groups of colonists set up socialist states, all with the same terrible results. At Jamestown, established in 1607, out of every shipload of settlers that arrived, less than half would survive their first twelve 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 five-hundred to sixty.

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 thirty men as three men have done for themselves now."

Before these free markets were established, the colonists had nothing for which to be thankful. They were in the same situation as Ethiopians are today, and for the same reasons. But after free markets were established, the resulting abundance was so dramatic that the annual Thanksgiving celebrations became common throughout the colonies, and in 1863, Thanksgiving became a national holiday.

Thus the real reason for Thanksgiving, deleted from the official story, is: Socialism does not work; the one and only source of abundance is free markets, and we thank God we live in a country where we can have them.

[*Guest*]

but this is a forum about Sweden and not about USA..
kill the turkey

[Mike]

I posted it in the Absolutely nothing to do with Sweden forum, n00b.

[*Guest*]

[Shark99 - The Great Catsb...]

Happy thanksgiving to you all.

[High Priestess Kang - Slu...]

Indians, enjoy your syphilis and small pox!

Love...
The Pilgrims

[Roger O. Thornhill]

off topic

[High Priestess Kang - Slu...]

You forgot your coffee drinking icon. Hope you're having a good Turkey Day, oh Evil Imperialist.

[*Guest*]

Kang! How was your Thanksgiving? I haven't asked you about where you are at in your recovery. What's the healing time line been like?

[High Priestess Kang - Slu...]

Happy Thanksgiving! I hope you had a wonderful day!!!

Turkey Day was pretty good. I managed to eat a little of the softer foods on the table...first actual solids in over a week. The pain...ugh...still here and reminding me that I'm alive.

How's everything going in your world?

[*Guest*]

Still in pain? I had no idea. I really had forgotten how long it took me to heal. First solid foods? Hm. The smell of turkey must have drove you wild.

My world is fine. Relatives though. And I guess I didn't take enough water with a pill yesterday, as I woke up feeling tightness in my chest and throat, and I, too, have had trouble swallowing today! Still, it was manageable, because I wanted to eat!

Hm. Suddenly feeling a little blue though. Kind of want to experience four kids in their jammies eating gingerbread and eggnog for breakfast. And a little sad that Benzed is so far from home this Christmas. And I was looking at pictures of Dutch voters and their thoughts on the election and I have to tell you that it's a crowded place with people with worse manners than Swedes, and it's rather boring and flat, and yet I miss it so incredibly much. Ah, the effects of large meals, relatives, and holiday time.

[High Priestess Kang - Slu...]

The post-feast buzz kill. I know what you mean.

*hugs torque*

[007]

the pilgrims starved because they were idiots. they arrived in december without enough to carry they through the winter. they also planned on becoming fishermen and live off the abundant cod stocks off the coast, yet the morons didn't even come with fishing equipment.

at the time, lobster, crabs and all sorts of the ocean's bounty was just crawling along the beaches for easy plucking, but for some reason, maybe the food wasn't good enough in their christian values, they starved.

50% of the mayflower were dead from starvation the first year.

you can blame that on whatever you want. i'm gonna call it stupidity.

[Faithless]

.

Not to mention pilgrimsmussla. Mmm.

.

[VikingHumpingWitch]

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. Bradford writes that "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." Also, "the strong, or man of parts, had no more in division of victuals and clothes, than he that was weak." So the young and strong refused to work and the total amount of food produced was never adequate.

Leaving aside the impressive feat of Karl Marx's words being used two centuries before he was even born, it rather seems to me that it's selfishness that killed them off - if they'd stuck the socialist view they'd all have survived. They didn't.[/i]