The Pilgrims failed with communal ownership required by their investors in London. The Pilgrims succeeded until they instituted private property.
The Pilgrims’ venture to the New World was financed by an investment syndicate in London that required the Pilgrims to put everything into a “common pool” which after seven years would be divided equally between investors and Pilgrims. The investors thought this “common wealth” contract condition would increase their probability of collecting their dues by pressuring the Pilgrims to work for “everyone” instead of working for their own private properties.
However, once this “communal ownership” was put into practice, it did not increase productivity or community participation. Quite the contrary. This form of communism demoralized the Pilgrims, and gave rise to new problems (i.e., unwillingness to work, confusion, discontent, loss of mutual respect, etc.) — typical of societies that adopt communism/socialism.
In brief, the Pilgrims experienced the failure of communal property and decided to replace it with private property, which allowed the colony to finally flourish.
This drastic change was recorded by William Bradford, the second governor of Plymouth, in his journal Of Plymouth Plantation. Bradford also criticized Plato’s utopianism where private property would be abolished and citizens would be “guided” by elitists.
(Click images to enlarge them) (Scroll down for transcription)
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 in that regard trust to themselves; in all other things to go on in the general way as before. And so assigned to every family a parcel of land, according to the proportion of their number, for that end, only for present use (but made no division for inheritance) and ranged all boys and youth under some family. 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 saved him a great deal of trouble, and gave far better content. The women now went willingly into the field, and took their little ones with them to set corn; which before would allege weakness and inability; whom to have compelled would have been thought great tyranny and oppression.
The experience that was had in this common course and condition, tried sundry years and that amongst godly and sober men, may well evince the vanity of that conceit of Plato’s and other ancients applauded by some of later times; that the taking away of property and bringing in community into a commonwealth would make them happy and flourishing; as if they were wiser than God. For this community (so far as it was) was found to breed much confusion and discontent and retard much employment that would have been to their benefit and comfort. For the young men, that were most able and fit for labour and service, did repine that they should spend their time and strength to work for other men’s wives and children without any recompense. The strong, or man of parts, had no more in division of victuals and clothes than he that was weak and not able to do a quarter the other could; this was thought injustice. The aged and graver men to be ranked and equalized in labours and victuals, clothes, etc., with the meaner and younger sort, thought it some indignity and disrespect unto them. And for men’s wives to be commanded to do service for other men, as dressing their meat, washing their clothes, etc., they deemed it a kind of slavery, neither could many husbands well brook it. Upon the point all being to have alike, and all to do alike, they thought themselves in the like condition, and one as good as another; and so, if it did not cut off those relations that God hath set amongst men, yet it did at least much diminish and take off the mutual respects that should be preserved amongst them. And would have been worse if they had been men of another condition. Let none object this is men’s corruption, and nothing to the course itself. I answer, seeing all men have this corruption in them, God in His wisdom saw another course fitter for them.
FLORIDA WILL NO LONGER BE ONE OF THE FREEST STATES IN THE UNION IF GILLUM BECOMES GOVERNOR
“Andrew Gillum Would Be a Disaster as Florida Governor,” is a great article published by NRO[1] warning all Floridians of democrat Andrew Gillum who is running for Governor of Florida in the 2018 election.
♦ Gillum will abandon the current low tax and pro-growth policy-making that have put Florida in a positive trajectory so far.
♦ Increase corporate tax rate to 11%.
♦ Increase sales tax to 39%.
♦ Or impose a state income tax of 37%.
♦ Florida would lose 155,188 direct jobs plus 111,355 indirect jobs; a total impact of 266,543 job lost annually.
♦ Household Income (worker income) for Floridians would lose $11.5 billion each year.
♦ Total economic impact would be negative: that is a loss of $28.2 billion annually.
GILLUM’S SOCIALIST AGENDA WAS TRIED IN VENEZUELA & OTHER COUNTRIES AND IT FAILED:
Another great article by NRO[3] reminds Americans how socialism has failed. Socialism was tried in Venezuela and it failed:
There is a pure socialist state at work in our global economy just now. It’s Venezuela, which has embraced a high minimum wage, open borders, universal healthcare — the whole Gillum package. The results there have been predictable. The minimum wage has punished the poor and the unskilled, as also the young and the old. The lack of border controls has been no problem, now that all of the human traffic is outbound. And the medical system does in fact treat all patients equally. In Venezuela today, everybody receives inadequate medical care. Our friend PJ O’Rourke said it best: “If you think healthcare is expensive now, wait until it’s free.”
Socialism failed around the world:
[I]n Russia as Soviet Communism and in Germany as national socialism [Nazism]; in China as Maoist totalitarianism and in Cuba as Castro collectivism. Indeed, the history of the 20th century can be read as one long refutation of socialist fallacy. Mayor Gillum seems to be unaware that in all of those test kitchens, the experiment ended the same way — first in a failed economy and then in a failed state.
VENEZUELANS VOTED FOR SOCIALISM, THIS IS WHAT THEY GOT IN RETURN:
Venezuelan immigrant speaks about socialism, economic crisis (June 9, 2016)
Venezuelan immigrant: Socialism is destroying the country (April 21, 2017)
“The problem with socialism is that, eventually, you run out of other people’s money” – Margaret Thatcher.
SOURCES:
[1] Andrew Gillum Would Be a Disaster as Florida Governor (Aug. 30, 2018)
#https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/08/andrew-gillum-would-be-disaster-florida-governor/
[2] FL Election: Gillum vs DeSantis:
The James Madison Institute (JMI), “Election 2018: Platforms, Proposals, Projections.” (10/15/2018) https://www.jamesmadison.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Election-2018.pdf
[3] For Florida Governor, It’s a Reagan Conservative vs. a Sanders Socialist (Sept. 5, 2018)
#https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/09/florida-governor-race-reagan-conservative-vs-sanders-socialist/
THE REAL JOHN KERRY
Meet the real John Kerry, who Obama nominated to succeed Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State:
John Kerry slandered American soldiers in Vietnam alleging systematic atrocities “reminiscent of Genghis Khan” during his infamous testimony to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on April 22, 1971. Kerry’s goal was to poison public opinion against the U.S. military, to force America out of Vietnam, and to allow the spread of Communism.
OBAMA: “I ACTUALLY BELIEVE IN REDISTRIBUTION”
In 1998, Obama revealed his admiration for wealth redistribution, which are confiscatory government policies where bureaucrats will find a way to take your wealth and distribute it to people of their chosing. “Your work and your wealth will belong to the elite of the government, who will decide who is given your money,” explains the article below.
In October 19, 1998, at a Loyola University conference, Obama said:
(Video mark 1:15)
“I think the trick is figuring out how do we structure government systems that pool resources and hence facilitate some redistribution, because I actually believe in redistribution, at least at a certain level to make sure that everybody’s got a shot.”
Your work and your wealth will belong to the government “in the name of society”; in other words, it will belong to the collective. Actually, though, your work and your wealth will belong to the elite of the government, who will decide who and what is given your money. This is what “redistribution of wealth” means in Obama’s philosophy; it is also the basic principle of communism.
The meaning of the “redistribution” of wealth is official government stealing and the end of your freedom. It is the beginning of your forced sacrifices for your leader, your government, and your society. This leads to a permanent realignment of power in society, as has been seen in Europe, or the rise of a dictator, as has been seen frequently in communist society.
For almost half of my life, I lived in communist Romania. I lived the other half in the free land, America. Believe me — I know what Obama is talking about and advocating for America.
Obama’s America is a communist society. As history shows, he will bring about this way of life by the following means:
1. Transforming private property into collective property.
…Under redistribution of wealth philosophy imposed by government — and of the communist system – you have no personal right to your work, property, or inheritance.
2. Destroying the initiative and creativity of people.
…[E]liminating from society individual power and desire curtails and squashes the drive for success.
A government does not create wealth. It is the private sector, where new businesses are started and flourish, that allows opportunity and wealth to expand. The private sector is responsible for economic growth…
3. Increasing the poverty of all who depend on government for basic needs.
Government redistribution will not help the poor. History has shown that redistribution of wealth makes all poor…History shows example after example of communist systems that have collapsed, each of which made promises like equality and justice and failed to deliver. But each of these collapses took millions of lives and many generations, as people discovered the lies…
Redistribution of wealth means not equality, fairness, or justice, but rather poverty, slavery, and a complete lack of freedom.
This November will you vote for Freedom or for Communism?
Make no mistake: this November election starkly concerns what we want our future as a country to be. We have to decide if we want to elect a president who will bring us back to the American values of free market and free opportunities to pursue the American dream, or if we want to elect a president who will take us into socialism and communism — in other words, the end of our freedom, where government controls, dictates to, and owns us.
DEMOCRATS: “WE ALL BELONG TO THE GOVERNMENT”
Democrats played this video during their recent Democrat National Convention stating that, “The Government is the only thing we all belong to.” (September 4, 2012).
OBAMA DOES IT AGAIN
The WeeklyStandard reported that Obama’s Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) used an image of Marxist murderer Che Guevara for an internal email to celebrate Hispanic Heritage Month. They copied several paragraphs from the website Buzzle.com and failed to give the proper attribution. But that’s not all. The image shows the Marxist slogan “Until Victory, Always” along with a poor man on a horse-pulled cart. This is how they picture Hispanics.
(H/t: WeaselZippers):
GUILLEN LOVES HOW CASTRO TORTURES THE CUBAN PEOPLE?
What is what Miami Marlins manager, Oswaldo José “Ozzie” Guillén, loves and respect so much of Cuban dictator Fidel Castro? Does Guillén love how the Castro regime has tortured, terrorized, jailed, and killed the Cuban people to stay in power for more than 50 years?
Now that he is the new manager of the Miami baseball team, Guillén decided to insult all those victims of the Marxist dictatorships in Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua, etc. who now live in Miami.
“I love Fidel Castro,” Blurts Ozzie Guillen, the new manager of the Miami Marlins, in his Jupiter, Fla., spring-training office before an early-March team workout.
Guillen told Time magazine that he loves Castro and respects him for staying in power so long…“The reason I say I admire him is because a lot of people want to get rid of this guy and they couldn’t yet,” Guillen told the Sun-Sentinel. […]
Guillen said he has never spoken to Chavez, but in fact he appeared on the Venezuelan leader’s national radio show twice in October 2005, when Guillen led the Chicago White Sox to the World Series title. At the time, Guillen said: “Not too many people like the president. I do. My mom will kill me, but it’s an honor to talk to the president.”
After Ozzie Guillen was quoted by a Time magazine reporter saying that he “respects” and “loves” Fidel Castro, Guillen and the Miami Marlins are now walking back the comments and attempting to put them in a context that would not seem so inflammatory to Miami’s residents. However, as the city that hosts the largest concentration of Fidel Castro’s victims, Guillen’s remarks, no matter how they try to qualify them, were certainly inflammatory and insensitive. […]
Hopefully, Mr. Guillen has finally learned the lesson that while …things are lawful, not all things are helpful or edifying.
Ozzie Guillen in 2005: Viva Chavez!
This video shows Guillen praising Marxist dictator Hugo Chavez. Guillen probably admires how Chavez has destroyed Venezuela, the once-prosperous South American country.
