The Tea Party sees Thanksgiving as a morality tale about finding salvation in Capitalism. The Pilgrims were failed Socialists who turned to Capitalism for survival. Only after foregoing communal ownership of property and allowing private ownership did the colony prosper. (Communism could also have been used, but socialism is the bogey meme du jour.)
The actual historical details are much more interesting than the Tea Party myth.
The Pilgrims formed a start-up and the Merchants and Adventurers of London were their venture capitalists. The Merchants would put up the cash for the supplies and the trip to the New World and the colonists would put up the labor. They signed a seven-year contract in which all land, livestock, lumber, furs, and other trade goods were held in partnership. At the end of the seven year period, the company was to be dissolved and the assets distributed. The Pilgrims were more like shareholders in a corporation than socialists.
Interestingly, only one Pilgrim died on the 66-day voyage. This is attributed to the fact that the Mayflower had never carried passengers, she was a “sweet ship.” Seepage from previous wine cargos had impregnated the ship’s timbers and acted like a disinfectant.
The Mayflower landed in November of 1620 and the first Thanksgiving was held in 1621. The colony’s governor, William Bradford, abolished the communal land arrangement and gave each household a parcel of land, in 1623. It seems unlikely that a colony in the grips of a famine, caused by evils of communal property ownership, would host a three-day feast. The prospects of a famine would come the following year with a devastating summer drought and the seasonal migration of fish and fowl.
Agriculture did become more profitable in following years, in part due to improved cultivation techniques of corn, a crop for which the colonists had no experience, and in part due to the increase in each individual’s exertion on their privately held land.
Two attempts to make payments to the investors were met with pirates, who captured the ships bringing back furs and timber. The investors, fearing a total loss of their investment, settled with the Pilgrims for £1800 after an investment of nearly £7000.
H/T: NY Times, New American, Dictionary of American History.
-David Drumm (Nal)
“Sociopaths don’t want to pay the price for their bad acts either. It’s part of the pathology.”
ooh that’s a real good counter argument. A guy making a 100k year in a small business is a sociopath because he only pays his part time high school help minimum wage.
Or Exxon is exploiting the public because they make about 25 cents profit on a gallon of gas but put hundreds of thousands of people to work. Your wonderful socialist government makes more on a gallon of gas than Exxon does and they don’t produce shit, except lazy pricks who couldn’t survive without the private sector paying their way.
boo hoo hoo.
The common man is cannon fodder for socialism, numb nut. Yeah socialism lifts the common man alright, right to heaven.
How much more exploitative can you be than to ask a man to die for the state for no good reason?
It is a sad trail of blood that leads to you and those like you. People like me and ekeyra aren’t even in the same league as you and your blood thirsty compatriots.
All we want is for a man to keep what he makes by the sweat of his brow to provide for himself and his family.
You want the family of 4 making $50,000 a year to pay for the family of 6 making $40,000 per year. Yeah you are a real uplifting guy.
You are a joke and blood thirsty to boot. How much blood is on your philosophical hands Mr. Uplifter? More gallons than I would want on my conscience.
Marxism is a bankrupt philosophy, as is socialism and its brother fascism.
Marxism = socialism = fascism = death.
Capitalism = Life and respect for the individual.
Reagan’s Insubstantial Projection,
“you cannot have free trade except in a free market.”
So which is it that you object to? Constraint on free trade or constraint on free markets?
I have no issue with free markets – for certain markets. For most markets in fact. That is the nature of democratic socialism: some markets are free and some are not and the ones that are not are the ones that people can exploit to their personal profit at the expense of society – which costs us all and subsidizes your income. Screw your income. Your desire for profit doesn’t mean you can steal from people not involved in your free market transaction to subsidize the true costs of your transactions you are unwilling to bear as a consequence of your choices to exploit others. If you can’t find an honest living that doesn’t require you to abuse others and pass those costs along to the rest of us, you’re no better than a common criminal. Steal with a gun, steal with a pen, it’s still stealing.
I have an issue with people who want to hide their exploitation behind the term free markets when what they mean is they are for the anachronism of Montaigneian free trade: personal profits over all and damn the consequences. Those are the kind of people that caused the 1929 market collapse, years of abusive child labor practices, the Battle of Matewan and our current TARP induced debacle where criminals are rewarded for their failures and crimes with income subsidies that come from tax coffers – taxes most of them have spent fortunes avoiding paying in the first place.
Venal is as venal does. And venal people suck.
The bottom line is that you want the ability to exploit people without fear of being punished. You don’t care about free markets. You only care about yourself, your profits and avoiding the consequences of your actions. When you adopt the “let them eat cake” attitude, you open the door for the natural response of the exploited as seen in history: “Eat the rich.” Society is bigger than you and your personal desires. And like most animals larger than you, it will eat you or kill you if you piss it off. People have lost their heads over that kind of thing.
The shortsightedness, greed and self-absorption you demonstrate is a form of anti-social behavior hiding behind misuse of economic terms as rationalization and propaganda aimed at people too generally too uneducated to realize you want to exploit them for personal gain by intimating that their “freedom” is under attack when the only freedom that is actually under attack is their freedom to live free of abuse and exploitation, you know, like truly free people. The ideas of socialism don’t attack the common man – they uplift him by freeing him from exploitation. What the ideas of socialism do attack is your retrograde idea that exploitation is just fine as long as you can personally profit. Sociopaths don’t want to pay the price for their bad acts either. It’s part of the pathology. The entire universe revolves around them and only them in their minds. Too bad for you, that’s simply delusional.
Gyges:
he is right and you and “B” are wrong.
I don’t think he is an Anarchist either, he is quoting Von Mises. I haven’t seen him quote Rothbard yet.
I hope he/she isn’t an Anarchist because some government is necessary to protect individual rights and provide for the national defense. But that is about it.
Ekeyra is right about socialist states making war and unfortunately the US has been involved in war after war since the start of the progressive era which was sometime in the late 19th century. Ever hear of Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson?
Ever wonder about that or why? You blame it on fascists but they are actually socialists. You think a company that takes money from government is capitalistic? It isn’t.
We need to return to true liberalism which is respect for the individual and denies the state the means to make our lives miserable.
You support a morally bankrupt system because of your kindness and desire to help people. People will be helped more when they are left alone to pursue their own path in political and economic freedom with a consistent set of laws to address conflicts.
Capitalism is that system as ekeyra has been trying to tell you. I will assume you are religous and follow the teachings of Christ due to your dislike for capitalism? The camel and the eye of the needle and all that we are our brothers keeper stuff?
Ekerya,
“I’ve no intention of converting anyone. What I would be interested in is showing you that the very systems you guys advocate lead to the problems you complain about.”
Right, you don’t want to convert me, just show me that you’re right and I’m wrong.
Like I said, I’ve been witnessed to plenty of times in my life. The thing about missionaries is they never want to have a dialogue. Since I do, I’ll leave you to your soap box Evangelizing for Anarchism. Too bad really, I like to talk to people I disagree with.
Actually i first came here because i like to keep track of police misconduct and this blog had a few interesting stories, and i have no intention of converting anyone. What I would be interested in is showing you that the very systems you guys advocate lead to the problems you complain about. As in first of all the wars america seems to be waging for really no discernable reason. Well who is funding that? Me and you and B and gipper and anyone who makes an income thats not off the radar. The taxes you pay for the public schools you support and the welfare you support also pay for the wars that neither of us support, and yet no matter who is in office, dubya or obama, they seem to keep escalating regardless of what supposed ideology is guiding the nations decision makers. Why do you suppose that is? Sure greed on the part of weapons manufacturers and lobbyists is a factor in that they supply the tools of the trade, but who is funneling the cash for all these toys? Are you telling me on a “free market” we’d all voluntarily agree to pool billions upon billions to buy f-22 raptors to fight an enemy that doesnt exist anymore? That is a prime example of socialist national defense spending leading to an outcome that neither you or I want and squandering massive amounts of resources in the process.
And just on a personal note, at least in my view, you are free to organize any society you wish. If you want a socialist mixed economy then by all means start one. I honestly wish you the best of luck. Just dont (a) tell me I have to be a part of it and (b) financially support it if i dont choose to be a part of it. Freedom is the freedom to make the wrong decisions and learn from them.
Ekerya,
If you can think of a way to demonstrate that I knew exactly what I was saying, and that what I was saying had meaning that didn’t involve a discussion of grammar and definitions, I’ll try that approach. All of that was a response to:
“if your that confused about your own position regarding socialism and free markets theres nothing i can do to help you except maybe offer some reading suggestions.”
and
““Most free market exchanges” is a meaningless combination of words.”
For the record: I’m trying my best to have a conversation with you. I read and consider every word you type. I’m being far more polite and friendly than your abrasive attitude thus far has warranted. I’ve been witnessed too enough in my life that I suspect you came in here looking to preach to the heathens. The problem is, we heathens have just as strong of beliefs as you. So you’re going to have to work a little harder than you expected to convert us.
I’m always open to discussing new ideas. What I’m never open being preached too. You think I’ve got my definitions wrong, show me the right ones. Don’t just tell me I’m wrong. Finally, for God’s sake, don’t get mad when I defend my point of view. If we agreed the conversation wouldn’t be worth having.
http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer
ekeyra:
in re gassing, I stand corrected. But I think you are right in that socialists love control. I haven’t figured out why, have you?
you cannot have free trade except in a free market. I may want a TV or even need one because I like to watch opera but in a socialist economy I am free to purchase a TV in terms of volition but I am not making a transaction which is based on objective value. The cost of the TV has been skewed by government intervention.
If you assign a value to a product or service you have negated market value and you have no objective value based on what the product or service is worth based on the billions of other transactions that enter into the value of your single product or service. Which is what ekeyra said above.
Gyges,
In re Byron:
Yep.
Buddha,
Makes me miss Byron. At least when we disagreed we had conversations instead of:
“Here’s the definition of a word.”
“No! You’re wrong socialism is evil!!!!!!”
B governments HAVE used nuclear weapons, no private individual has ever used them. Yet you would side with those who have shown their willingness to endanger human lives on the largest scale possible. and you call me a bootlicker.
Also for all your hot air you never answered my question about the minimum wage. Why not set it at 100 dollars an hour? Wouldnt that make everyone rich?
Gyges you and B can both shove your english lessons.
“Which is, an economy in which some markets are regulated or controlled, and others are free.”
The markets which are controlled and regulated will cause economic distortions throughout the rest of the “free” market. Hence any intervention eliminates a free market. For example lets look at drugs. The government insists it has the right to tell us what we can and cannot put into our own bodies, which gives rise to a black market because the government can interfere with supply but it cannot regulate demand, which is subjective. Therefore anyone wishing to participate in this market must subject themselves to the possibility of violence. From the government and from the suppliers who must use violence to handle any conflicts that arise because engaging in harmless yet illegal business means you cannot resolve disputes peaceably in a court of law. Just because i could purchase an illegal substance at an insanely inflated price from someone who may or may wish to do me harm is no reason to assume that it is a “free market interaction”.
Gip i dont think socialists have some natural tendency to want to gas people. I just think they have control issues. Thats why B hates money. It allows people to make decisions he doesnt agree with, like buying their kid a happy meal.
Also Bda and gip prices are subjective, not objective. Gip hit the entire matter on the nose. When you have confiscated tax dollars rolling into agriculture how do you know what the market value of milk is? You cant. That is the very distortion to basic economic calculations that socialism causes. Its not a bad idea because the nazis called themselves socialists and gassed people. It is a bad idea because it obfuscates the very real economic decisions people need to make to go about their daily lives.
Bdaman:
you troll you, how do you know what with all the socialist subsidies given to dairy farmers?
“Therefore no transaction is a voluntary exchange between 2 parties. There is always some external factor that must enter into the decision to contract or not contract.”
You want a TV, you don’t need a TV and no one forces you to buy one, ergo, buying a TV is a voluntary transaction. You are 1) mistaking “need” and “want” and 2) mistaking free trade for free markets.
“Even a black market is not free because the seller and purchaser must weigh the risks of imprisonment or worse.”
You mistake the influence of circumstance on price as it relates to supply and demand with free market mechanisms.
“‘The economic value of a man’s work is determined, on a free market, by a single principle: by the voluntary consent of those who are willing to trade him their work or products in return.’
And that is what is distorted by socialism. Socialism reduces the value of a mans work so that no true value can be assigned to a product or service.”
That something is only worth what someone will pay for it is not a surprise. A true value can be assigned under socialist models but it is assigned so that any associated social costs are borne by those voluntarily involved directly in the transaction instead of allowing those costs to be passed on to the rest of society thus not publicly supplementing your income should you choose to engage in high cost transactions.
“The beautiful thing about trolls to respond to is that they cost me personally nothing and provide endless hours of enjoyment.
One need not spend money to have a good time.”
man do you have that right. It is too bad more people don’t subscribe to this form of entertainment.
we don’t actually know what the price of a gallon of milk really is.
I know, I know, three dollars and fifty nine cents
Gyges:
your only problem with that explanation is that you are wrong. You either have a free economy or you don’t. In our country there is nothing that is not taxed or regulated or illegal.
Therefore no transaction is a voluntary exchange between 2 parties. There is always some external factor that must enter into the decision to contract or not contract.
Even a black market is not free because the seller and purchaser must weigh the risks of imprisonment or worse.
“The economic value of a man’s work is determined, on a free market, by a single principle: by the voluntary consent of those who are willing to trade him their work or products in return.”
And that is what is distorted by socialism. Socialism reduces the value of a mans work so that no true value can be assigned to a product or service. The objective value is distorted due to the vigorish paid to government. Since no objective value is possible we don’t actually know what the price of a gallon of milk really is.
The beautiful thing about trolls to respond to is that they cost me personally nothing and provide endless hours of enjoyment.
One need not spend money to have a good time.
Quick clarification
“…there is nothing contradictory in saying that socialism can co-exist with free market or free market transactions.” It’s funny how you read the words you wanted to write instead of the words you wrote.