The Real Story of Thanksgiving

[Red Storm Rising]

LOL.. What is Surapee? My family has been in this country since the early 1600s.

Surada is Indian, so why do I doubt that you were here in the 1600's. Were you one of the Indian pilgrims? LOL

Surapee is a sauce, like the bullshit sauce you spread in this forum.

The shithole country is in your mind still.

 

[surada]

Surada is Indian, so why do I doubt that you were here in the 1600's. Were you one of the Indian pilgrims? LOL

Surapee is a sauce, like the bullshit sauce you spread in this forum.

The shithole country is in your mind still.

Nope.. I'm Irish and Dutch.. My anchestors were seacaptains who went to Recif, Brazil in the late 1500s and built one of the first homes in New Amsterdam.. There is a brass plaque in Manhattan where their house used to be and lots of church records on births, marriage etc. Dutch Reformed..

You're 59 and still ignorant.

 

[Red Storm Rising]

Nope.. I'm Irish and Dutch.. My anchestors were seacaptains who went to Recif, Brazil in the late 1500s and built one of the first homes in New Amsterdam.. There is a brass plaque in Manhattan where their house used to be and lots of church records on births, marriage etc. Dutch Reformed.

And yet you chose an Indian screen name.

You are a disgrace to your ancestors with your socialist Marxist filth.

 

[Red Storm Rising]

 

[task0778]

Conforming to an ideology or an agenda seems to be on the rise in today's America, with maybe not enough thought into what we are conforming to. First of all, it takes guts that a lot of people don't have, or in some cases can't afford to. It's one thing to decline to conform when you're wealthy, but it's another when you've got a family to support and bills to pay and you don't want to lose your job. Maybe we sometimes do not really accept 'wokeism' but say nothing about it, and I get that. And it could be that the Left is overestimating how strong their message is resonating with the American people and the voters. We'll see if that's true next November and in 2024.

 

[task0778]

For those who didn't listen to Rush, this is basically what he wanted to say:

The first few years of the settlement were fraught with hardship and hunger. Four centuries later, they also provide us with one of history’s most decisive verdicts on the critical importance of private property. We should never forget that the Plymouth colony was headed straight for oblivion under a communal, socialist plan but saved itself when it embraced something very different.

In the diary of the colony’s first governor, William Bradford, we can read about the settlers' initial arrangement: Land was held in common. Crops were brought to a common storehouse and distributed equally. For two years, every person had to work for everybody else (the community), not for themselves as individuals or families. Did they live happily ever after in this socialist utopia?

Hardly. The “common property” approach killed off about half the settlers. Governor Bradford recorded in his diary that everybody was happy to claim their equal share of production, but production only shrank. Slackers showed up late for work in the fields, and the hard workers resented it. It’s called “human nature.”

The disincentives of the socialist scheme bred impoverishment and conflict until, facing starvation and extinction, Bradford altered the system. He divided common property into private plots, and the new owners could produce what they wanted and then keep or trade it freely.

Communal socialist failure was transformed into private property/capitalist success, something that’s happened so often historically it’s almost monotonous. The “people over profits” mentality produced fewer people until profit—earned as a result of one’s care for his own property and his desire for improvement—saved the people.

Why the Pilgrims Abandoned Common Ownership for Private Property | Lawrence W. Reed

In the diary of Plymouth Colony’s first governor, William Bradford, we can read about the settlers' initial arrangement: Land was held in common. Crops were brought to a common storehouse and distributed equally. For two years, every person had to work for everybody else (the community), not for...

fee.org

I'm not going to say that every democrat wants a true socialist society/economy. Some of them are going along to get along, they like the idea of equality and most of us like the idea of equality, right? The problem comes in when you equate equality with equity, IOW equal outcomes. It's funny, many of the democrats will deny that, but when you look at what they're trying to accomplish, that's exactly what it is. Taking something from someone who owns it and giving it to someone who didn't earn it. And that just doesn't sit well with most Americans IMHO. So, the democrats find ways to make it sound different or rationalize it in some manner to make it sound better. They emotionalize it to make you feel like a dirty rotten bastard if you don't support their ideas about redistribution of wealth. The Pilgrims tried it and it didn't work.

 

[surada]

And yet you chose an Indian screen name.

You are a disgrace to your ancestors with your socialist Marxist filth.

It means a strong south wind in Spanish.

 

[surada]

For those who didn't listen to Rush, this is basically what he wanted to say:

The first few years of the settlement were fraught with hardship and hunger. Four centuries later, they also provide us with one of history’s most decisive verdicts on the critical importance of private property. We should never forget that the Plymouth colony was headed straight for oblivion under a communal, socialist plan but saved itself when it embraced something very different.

In the diary of the colony’s first governor, William Bradford, we can read about the settlers' initial arrangement: Land was held in common. Crops were brought to a common storehouse and distributed equally. For two years, every person had to work for everybody else (the community), not for themselves as individuals or families. Did they live happily ever after in this socialist utopia?

Hardly. The “common property” approach killed off about half the settlers. Governor Bradford recorded in his diary that everybody was happy to claim their equal share of production, but production only shrank. Slackers showed up late for work in the fields, and the hard workers resented it. It’s called “human nature.”

The disincentives of the socialist scheme bred impoverishment and conflict until, facing starvation and extinction, Bradford altered the system. He divided common property into private plots, and the new owners could produce what they wanted and then keep or trade it freely.

Communal socialist failure was transformed into private property/capitalist success, something that’s happened so often historically it’s almost monotonous. The “people over profits” mentality produced fewer people until profit—earned as a result of one’s care for his own property and his desire for improvement—saved the people.

Why the Pilgrims Abandoned Common Ownership for Private Property | Lawrence W. Reed

In the diary of Plymouth Colony’s first governor, William Bradford, we can read about the settlers' initial arrangement: Land was held in common. Crops were brought to a common storehouse and distributed equally. For two years, every person had to work for everybody else (the community), not for...

fee.org

I'm not going to say that every democrat wants a true socialist society/economy. Some of them are going along to get along, they like the idea of equality and most of us like the idea of equality, right? The problem comes in when you equate equality with equity, IOW equal outcomes. It's funny, many of the democrats will deny that, but when you look at what they're trying to accomplish, that's exactly what it is. Taking something from someone who owns it and giving it to someone who didn't earn it. And that just doesn't sit well with most Americans IMHO. So, the democrats find ways to make it sound different or rationalize it in some manner to make it sound better. They emotionalize it to make you feel like a dirty rotten bastard if you don't support their ideas about redistribution of wealth. The Pilgrims tried it and it didn't work.

They did it temporarily for survival.

 

[Red Storm Rising]

We don't need your footnote

 

[Red Storm Rising]

On this Thanksgiving day, it is important to remember the true history of America and be thankful for the freedoms that this nation was founded on, that heroic men gave their lives for. To listen to the non-stop propaganda of Democrats and the media, our nation was built by racist white Christian men. But Mark knows better. And, as illuminating Civil War history reveals, the men and boys of the Union army – mostly white Christian men - sacrificed their own lives to end slavery and preserve the Union. So, why is no one in the media telling the true story?