How the Pilgrims Made Progress [They switched from collective farming to private farming]

The textbooks don't explain why the Pilgrims had only a meager harvest in 1621, so we will. For their first two years in Plymouth, the settlers conducted an experiment in communalism. It wasn't until 1623 that they divided the land into private plots and could look forward to the kind of bounty that many of us enjoyed yesterday. In his "History of Plimoth Plantation," the colony's governor, William Bradford, wrote about how the settlers studied human nature and laid the foundation for true Thanksgiving:

All this while 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, after much debate of things, the Governor (with the advice of the chiefest amongst them) gave way that they should set corn every man for his own particular. . . . And so assigned to every family a parcel of land, according to the proportion of their number. . . .

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 gave far better content.

From a recent commentary by Peter Marshall, author of THE LIGHT AND THE GLORY

Every school child has been told for decades upon decades that the Pilgrims came to America for religious liberty, or religious freedom. Wrong. Shallow history teaching.

The fact is that they were missionaries, coming to the new world to plant the Gospel of Jesus Christ in the wilderness. As their great governor and chronicler, William Bradford, wrote: "They had a great hope and inward zeal of laying some good foundation...for the propagating and advancing the Gospel of the kingdom of Christ in those remote parts of the world; yea, though they should be but even as stepping-stones unto others for the performing of so great a work." Obviously, they had a strong sense of call and mission.

. . . With no shelter, and immune systems weakened by the rough voyage, they began to get sick. Colds became bronchitis, and pneumonia set in. The dreaded killer of ship's passengers -- scurvy -- and other "wasting sicknesses" ravaged their number. With no effective medicines, they began to die. In January and February the deaths sometimes reached two and three a day; 17 dying in February alone. At one point, there were only five people well enough to be on their feet, caring for the rest. Toward the end of March, when the worst was over, they had lost 47 of their number. Of the 18 wives who had come, 13 had died. Only three families remained unbroken. They were in real trouble, for the food they had brought on the Mayflower was virtually gone, and they were facing an unhospitable wilderness.

But God's greatest miracle for them was on its way! On March 16th, 1621, a lone Indian, clad only in a loincloth, had walked boldly up to them and said: "Welcome, Englishmen!"

Squanto offered them his services, and they were invaluable. He taught them how to trap eels in the mud flats of the bay, what berries were edible, what herbs were good for medicine, and how to trap beaver, which would later become a source of income for the Pilgrims. Most important of all, he taught them how to plant corn, and plant it the Indian way -- by burying dead fish with the seed, to fertilize the seedlings as they grew. He was God's instrument for their salvation.

http://www.petermarshallministries.com/commentary.cfm?commentary=28

Every school child has been told for decades upon decades that the Pilgrims came to America for religious liberty, or religious freedom. Wrong. Shallow history teaching.

Bradford may have said they were on a mission, but the fact is that they suffered from a lot of persecution and they were chased across Europe before coming to America. If he didn't point out that fact, maybe he didn't think it was Christian to sound bitter.

From Wikipedia:

"When James I began to persecute separatists in 1608, Bradford fled to the Netherlands, along with many members of the congregation. These "separatist" Puritans went first to Amsterdam before settling at Leiden. Bradford married his first wife Dorothy May (1597 – December 7, 1620) on December 10, 1613 in Amsterdam. While at Leiden, he supported himself as a fustian weaver.

"Shifting alignments of the European powers (due to religious differences, struggles over the monarchies and intrigues within the ruling Habsburg clan) caused the Dutch government to fear war with Catholic Spain, and to become allied with James I of England. Pressure, and even attacks on the separatists increased in the Netherlands.

"Their congregation's leader, John Robinson, supported the emerging idea of starting a colony. Bradford was in the midst of this venture from the beginning. The separatists wanted to remain Englishmen (although living in the Netherlands), yet wanted to get far enough away from the Church of England and the government, to have some chance of living in peace. "

I'd prefer distinctions made between "communalism", "collectivism" and "communism".

In my mind, communalism is the opposite to "communism".

"Communism" (Marxism) is absolute state government control of production, ownership and distribution. The way I see it the communist state (national govt) is the only entity having ownership and holding capital. The leavings are distributed among the "unwashed masses." Hence, a key to anti-capitalists' mentality: they really COVET the absolute power of capital. In other words, the communist totalitarian government not only rules, it is the ONLY existing "capitalist corporation" engaged in trade and commerce for profit.

By contrast, tribal or colonial "communalism" is a joint venture mutually agreed upon by self-governing individuals, so to speak. A commune is not a centralized totalitarian state.

Collectivism? It's a Marxist concept or term.
The convoluted theories and nefarious mandates of Marxism/communism contrives a mind game.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.