Pilgrims and Minutemen: Lessons for the Left from 1623 and 1776

PJABBER

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2001
4,822
0
0
Once upon a midnight dreary, while I pondered, weak and weary,
Over many a quaint and curious volume of forgotten lore —
While I nodded, nearly napping, suddenly there came a tapping,
As of some one gently rapping, rapping at my chamber door —
"'Tis some visiter," I muttered, "tapping at my chamber door —
Only this and nothing more."

The thoughts were deep but the matters shallow,
Till I clicked to one more site, one more to follow
The subject ancient, the cause abrupt
The lesson learned then was not enough

I was surely curious, could not hold my query
There comes back to haunt the midnight weary
A story told, a truth revealed
That America was not what the Left concealed.

(With a fervent apology to the ghost of Edgar Allen Poe)

:awe:

Pilgrims and Minutemen: Lessons for the Left from 1623 and 1776

by Kerry J. Byrne

Misguided leftists can learn a lot from American history. They can learn a lot, specifically, from the lessons provided us by the Pilgrims clinging to life on the Massachusetts coast in 1623 and by the wide-eyed British invaders who set foot on the New World in 1776.

6a00e54f9e3464883401053622de49970c-800wi.jpg

Just ask Nathaniel Philbrick and David McCullough, two of the nation’s most popular contemporary historians.

I couldn’t help but notice very illuminating (and perhaps unintended) odes to traditional conservative values in recent works by each author about pivotal moments in American history.

The first illuminating passage came in Philbrick’s spectacular book, “Mayflower: A Story of Courage, Community and War.”

He does an incredible job of taking the pop-culture caricature of the Pilgrims and bringing their real story to life – real humans with real struggles and hopes and dreams.

You know the basic story of the early days of the Plymouth Colony. The settlers had trouble feeding themselves in the first few years, to the point that starvation was a very real problem. But they quickly found a solution.

Here are Philbrick’s words:
“The fall of 1623 marked the end of Plymouth’s debilitating food shortages. For the last two planting seasons, the Pilgrims had grown crops communally … but as the disastrous harvest of the previous fall had shown, something drastic needed to be done to increase the annual yield.”
So here’s what happened:
“(Governor William) Bradford decided that each household should be assigned his own plot to cultivate, with the understanding that each family kept whatever it grew. The change in attitude was stunning. Families were now willing to work much harder than they had ever worked before … The Pilgrims had stumbled upon the power of capitalism. Although the fortunes of the colony still teetered precariously in the years ahead, the inhabitants never again starved.”
The bounty of the land, its ability to provide for hard-working individualists, was never again in doubt.

If you need proof, simply fast forward 150 years through history to another illuminating passage, this one found in McCullough’s “1776,” his masterpiece about the darkest but most celebrated year in American history.

He describes the reaction of King George’s troops when they landed during the amphibious invasion of Brooklyn on Aug. 22.
“The Hessian and British troops alike were astonished to find Americans blessed with such abundance – substantial farmhouses and furnishings. ‘In all the fields the finest fruit is to be found,’ Lieutenant von Bardeleben wrote … ‘The peach and apple trees are especially numerous … The houses, in part, are made only of wood and the furnishings in them are excellent. Comfort, beauty, and cleanliness are readily apparent’”
It pays to remember that these visitors were not from some poor foreign land. They were, instead, agents of the world’s mightiest empire, an empire with vast resources from their holdings in every corner of the earth. Nobody enjoyed access to more material advantages than the British. Yet even they were impressed by the wealth that they witnessed upon arriving on America’s shores.

McCullough goes on to write:
“Americans of 1776 enjoyed a higher standard of living than any people in the world. Their material wealth was considerably less than it would become in time, still it was a great deal more than others had elsewhere.”
McCullough believes “that it must have been incomprehensible to the invaders that people with so much would rebel against their rulers.”

But the invaders, if they asked the question, were looking at things the wrong way.

The wealth and bounty of the people, greater than that of any others in the world, did not come from some central authority; it was not granted by the largesse of London, much like wealth and growth cannot be granted by Washington today.

In fact, the people only rebelled when it became clear that London wanted a piece of the action, and wanted to intercede into the lives of a people who enjoyed a level of autonomy unlike that of any people in the history of the world.

This autonomy, this need to answer only to themselves and to their local communities, had made a sparsely populated group of settlers on the Atlantic Coast the wealthiest corner of the world in the space of just 150 years.

This wealth was created by the hard work and individual initiative of the people themselves, who owed little of that wealth to a central authority. It took the Pilgrims just two planting seasons to figure it all out.

Yet nearly 400 years later, American leftists still don’t get it.
 
Last edited:

Atreus21

Lifer
Aug 21, 2007
12,001
571
126
Gonna play a lil devil's advocate.

I don't think any intelligent modern leftist seriously argues that the Free Market doesn't work. I think they argue against abuses and exploitation of the system.

While I don't agree with their arguments in support of this assertion, I can understand the motivation.
 

jackschmittusa

Diamond Member
Apr 16, 2003
5,972
1
0
Why not mention John Rockefeller or Andrew Carnegie in your history lesson about free market capitalism? Or a few other famous, crooked robber barons who would lie, cheat and steal to make a buck.

Because it wouldn't support your distorted world view?

For every one of your cherry picks from history, you can find several to counter them.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
35,555
9,791
136
Yet nearly 400 years later, American leftists still don’t get it.

The President himself said the Bill of Rights should be a list of things the government does TO you. As opposed to a list of things it cannot do. Can the message be any clearer?

We've long since lost our way. We've traded one church and god for another. Mankind thinks himself grand, yet we are still the same ape that destroyed Rome.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
35,555
9,791
136
Why not mention John Rockefeller or Andrew Carnegie in your history lesson about free market capitalism? Or a few other famous, crooked robber barons who would lie, cheat and steal to make a buck.

Because it wouldn't support your distorted world view?

For every one of your cherry picks from history, you can find several to counter them.

Freedom is a distorted and cherry picked world view?

Yours is a government robber baron. No better than the devil you point to. Worse in that its abuses are legally enforced at the point of a gun and the mask of authority. Far worse in that the watch dog has become the fox guarding the hen house.
 

jackschmittusa

Diamond Member
Apr 16, 2003
5,972
1
0
Jaskalas

Nice twist! My post did not address "freedom" in any classical sense, nor does your comment on government. So we can dismiss that bullshit.

Government provides you with many benefits and protections for your contribution. You might argue that it provides too much or charges too much, but equating it to a "robber baron" just means that you really don't understand the term. Perhaps you need to brush up on your history a little more. Or maybe you just don't care much for accuracy anyway as long as you think your BS makes a point. This kind of crap is no better than "death panels".
 

Thump553

Lifer
Jun 2, 2000
12,837
2,622
136
Good idea-lets go back to the hyper-intolerant extremist religious sect commune life style.

Got to love conservatives with selective recall lecturing us on our supposed failings.

Interesting distortion labeling British troops at the time of the Revolution as invaders of their own colonies. I bet 100:1 the author of that opinion piece would object vehemently to a characterization of USA as invading Iraq and occupying it, even though we didn't even have the pretense of a prior colony.
 

elitejp

Golden Member
Jan 2, 2010
1,080
20
81
That was an interesting read. It fully agrees with my opinion that anytime you take someones wealth and give it to someone else your going to get laziness from both sides. Ive argued that america has long since stopped being a capitalistic country. Its now a country that tries to make everyones living standards equal without requiring people to do equal amounts of work.
 

elitejp

Golden Member
Jan 2, 2010
1,080
20
81
Interesting distortion labeling British troops at the time of the Revolution as invaders of their own colonies. I bet 100:1 the author of that opinion piece would object vehemently to a characterization of USA as invading Iraq and occupying it, even though we didn't even have the pretense of a prior colony.

Well then why dont you tell Obama to "bring our troops home". I mean does he need another term before he can get that done. Its not like he didnt have a majority senate and house to work on this issue:rolleyes:

Now for a more realistic opinion their must be papers that both Bush and Obama have seen that have necessitated troops in the middle east. :hmm:
 

Thump553

Lifer
Jun 2, 2000
12,837
2,622
136
Well then why dont you tell Obama to "bring our troops home". I mean does he need another term before he can get that done. Its not like he didnt have a majority senate and house to work on this issue:rolleyes:

Now for a more realistic opinion their must be papers that both Bush and Obama have seen that have necessitated troops in the middle east. :hmm:

News Flash: Obama is bringing home the troops from Iraq, just as he promised-under a timetable made public months ago. Catch up with reality. To rush bringing home the troops would made Bush's vanity war even worse.

Another interesting rightwing distortion-Obama can't immediately solve the fuckups we caused so he must be a failure -or fellow traveler to Bush, in addition to being a marxist/socialist/devil.

You guys need to start thinking logically.
 

elitejp

Golden Member
Jan 2, 2010
1,080
20
81
haha I did miss that. It happens when living overseas. But im still glad Pres Bush was in office during 911 rather than a dem. Now reading bits of Obamas speech it looks like we will be transferring our forces to Afghanistan to continue to fight a war against terror.
Which is what Bush started with his little vanity war. Hopefully the republicans wont turn this into a political issue like the dems did with the war in Iraq, because we know how benevolent of a ruler Sadam was.
 

MJinZ

Diamond Member
Nov 4, 2009
8,192
0
0
Good idea-lets go back to the hyper-intolerant extremist religious sect commune life style.

Got to love conservatives with selective recall lecturing us on our supposed failings.

Interesting distortion labeling British troops at the time of the Revolution as invaders of their own colonies. I bet 100:1 the author of that opinion piece would object vehemently to a characterization of USA as invading Iraq and occupying it, even though we didn't even have the pretense of a prior colony.

Yea, they also forgot the fact that most of the nation was made wealthy by conquering and killing the Indians, exploiting the rich land and environment, enslaving Blacks for free labor, paying immigrant Asians peanuts to build the rail-roads and now creating a class division where the top 1% hold like something of 40% or so of the nation's wealth.

But nope, it was definitely the hard-working, capitalistic, self-interested, conservative religious nutcakes that provided all the wealth.
 

cwjerome

Diamond Member
Sep 30, 2004
4,346
26
81
Why not mention John Rockefeller or Andrew Carnegie in your history lesson about free market capitalism? Or a few other famous, crooked robber barons who would lie, cheat and steal to make a buck.

I'm not sure that Rockefeller and Carnegie are great examples of free market capitalism. It takes more than lying, cheating, and stealing to create coersive monopolies and many billions of dollars... it takes government intervention. Special privileges, licenses, subsidies, regulations, etc, plenty of which both had. Oh, and illegal business activities.

If you believe government intervention and illegal activity are the cornerstones of a free market then I'll have to disagree.
 

jackschmittusa

Diamond Member
Apr 16, 2003
5,972
1
0
cwjerome

All I tried to do was point out that the OP was doing cherry picking that was not really much of the story of the history of the free markets in this country. Some of the robber barons had government intervention and special privileges like those of the railroad, but the ones I chose to mention did it almost entirely through lying, cheating, and stealing.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
74,598
6,715
126
Communalism is only possible among the spiritually wealthy. Is isn't possible for a community to be spiritually wealthy that is starving. Those who hate themselves will always try to life of the bounty of others because their self hate destroys their self confidence. As soon as a door is opened for a self hater to get ahead of others, he will take it. By the way, the opposite side of the coin with self hate is love of the ego. If you are proud of who you are you can be sure your life is empty. Real self love and pride in self are completely different things.
 

WHAMPOM

Diamond Member
Feb 28, 2006
7,628
183
106
Once upon a midnight dreary, while I pondered, weak and weary,
Over many a quaint and curious volume of forgotten lore —
While I nodded, nearly napping, suddenly there came a tapping,
As of some one gently rapping, rapping at my chamber door —
"'Tis some visiter," I muttered, "tapping at my chamber door —
Only this and nothing more."

The thoughts were deep but the matters shallow,
Till I clicked to one more site, one more to follow
The subject ancient, the cause abrupt
The lesson learned then was not enough

I was surely curious, could not hold my query
There comes back to haunt the midnight weary
A story told, a truth revealed
That America was not what the Left concealed.

(With a fervent apology to the ghost of Edgar Allen Poe)

:awe:

Serf system Vrs. freeman and abundant natural resources are a left/right issue? Blog somewhere else.
 

PJABBER

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2001
4,822
0
0
Wow, if I had a time machine I could teleport back to 1623 and have a REAL what fer with those crazy Pilgrims.

I could tell them that the effort they are putting in will be derided and mocked in 2010.

Then it will be a short hop to 1776 where I am sure I can find my way to the Continental Army and convince them that they had better get right with their dialectical materialism.

Oh, for such a chance to rewrite history (and reality) to a leftist's ideal!

ROTFLMAO! :awe::awe::awe:
 

djmartins

Member
Nov 19, 2009
63
0
0
Yea, they also forgot the fact that most of the nation was made wealthy by conquering and killing the Indians, exploiting the rich land and environment, enslaving Blacks for free labor, paying immigrant Asians peanuts to build the rail-roads and now creating a class division where the top 1% hold like something of 40% or so of the nation's wealth.

But nope, it was definitely the hard-working, capitalistic, self-interested, conservative religious nutcakes that provided all the wealth.

And this, people of the United States, is a prime example of how degraded and corrupted the minds of Americans had become.
The infection of terminal communism had so rotted the brains of the people that the majority of the people not only welcomed slavery, they cried out for it.

I insist that slavery is a natural state and that a large percentage of people in any society are not capable of being anything but a slave due
to their lack of ambition, responsibility, intelligence, and ability to take care of themselves.


regards,
DJ