Private Property Rights Made the First Thanksgiving Possible
Something to be grateful for.

Happy Thanksgiving!
But beware the "tragedy of the commons." It almost killed off the pilgrims.
Now, via Washington, D.C., it's probably coming for us.
Tragedy of the commons is a concept from an essay by ecologist Garrett Hardin. He wrote how cattle ranchers sharing a common parcel of land soon destroy that land. That's because each rancher has an incentive to put cattle on the common. Soon, the extra animals eat all the grass. Shared grazing space is destroyed because no rancher has an incentive to conserve.
If the ranchers put up a few fences and divide the land, each rancher has an incentive to limit grazing. That saves the grass and the cattle.
Sharing things and "public" property sound nice, but only private ownership reliably inspires people to conserve and protect.
No one washes a rental car.
I bring this up now because the Democrats' new multitrillion-dollar spending bills are all about expanding the commons: more free highways, free health care, free day care, free money for parents, housing subsidies, tax credits for electric vehicles, etc.
All these handouts discourage responsibility by making it easier to take from the "commons."
Save for retirement? Why? The government will cover it. Save up for college? Why? Government will give you grants and loans and then forgive those loans.
I bring this up now because this same sort of thinking nearly killed the pilgrims.
When they came to America, the pilgrims decided to share everything. The governor of Plymouth Colony, William Bradford, wrote that the pilgrims thought "taking away of property and [making it communal]…would make them happy and flourishing."
Food and supplies were distributed based on need. Pilgrims would not selfishly produce food for themselves.
In other words, they, like Sen. Bernie Sanders (I–Vt.) and many American young people today, fell in love with the idea of socialism.
The result was ugly. When the first harvest came, there wasn't nearly enough food. Many pilgrims died that winter. If the Wampanoag American Indians hadn't helped them, all might have starved.
It was the tragedy of the commons. No individual pilgrim owned crops they grew, so no one had an incentive to work harder to produce extra to sell to others. Since even slackers got food from the communal supply, they had no incentive to work hard.
Many didn't.
Strong men thought it was an "injustice" that they "had no more in division of victuals and clothes than he that was weak and not able to do a quarter the other could." Women had to cook and clean for other women's husbands, and they "deemed it a kind of slavery."
The shared farming, Bradford concluded, "was found to breed much confusion and discontent and retard much employment that would have been to their benefit."
When the Pilgrims ran out of food, they "began to think how they might raise as much corn as they could, and obtain a better crop…that they might not still thus languish in misery."
Their solution was private property. They split up the collective farm and gave every family a plot of land.
That was a big success. "It made all hands very industrious, so as much more corn was planted than otherwise would have been," wrote Bradford. "The women now went willingly into the field, and took their little ones with them to set corn." Before, they "would allege weakness and inability."
Thanks to individual plots of land, food shortages turned into a surplus that became the feast we now call Thanksgiving.
"All men have this corruption," Bradford observed. In a common, everyone wants to take as much as they can.
Private property created prosperity.
This Thanksgiving, I'm thankful for private property.
It's why I can eat turkey.
COPYRIGHT 2021 BY JFS PRODUCTIONS INC.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Collectivists assaulting Thanksgiving have spuddered out of control.
They need to be put on assault free diet.
It would be more than just window dressing.
That's some weak cranberry sauce.
Too corny?
[ Work at Home ] I get paid more than $90 to $100 per hour for working online. I heard about this job 3 months ago and after joining this I have earned easily $10k from this without having online working skills . Simply give it a shot on the accompanying site…
Here is I started.…………>> READ MORE
Hi) I'm Paula, I'm 24) I work as a model 18+) Please rate my erotic photos - https://xurl.es/id378955
Eye C what U did there.
This year do not worry about money you can start a new Business and do an online job I have started a new Business and I am making over $84, 8254 per month I was started with 25 persons company VBk now I have make a company of 200 peoples you can start a Business with a company of 10 to 50 peoples or join an online job.
For more info Open on this web Site............E-CASH
Criminalize collectivism. They’ve declared war on us already. So get rid of them.
Acts against Life, Liberty, and Property are already criminal. The idea of Collectivism, however, like all bad ideas, is fully protected freedom of thought, speech, and expression.
You're right - it is protected - stupid, but protected. Collectivism has never worked on a large scale and is sometimes contentious even in groups as small as a family or extended family.
But our socialist friends keep assuring us, "This time we'll do it better". And to do that, they have always been willing to enslave, imprison, or kill those who resist their wisdom and their desire to do good to us.
Is it even meant to work though?
The only real goal is power.
They think life is one big gravy train! Well they can all go get stuffed!
If you were Searching for a supplemental source of income? This is the easiest way I have found to earn $5000+ per week over the internet. Work for a few hours per week in your free time and get paid on a regular basis.HRe Only reliable internet connection and computer needed to get started…
Start today...........Earn-Opportunities
Something something land taken from the Natives something open borders.
Natives that lived in peaceful agrarian harmony, and never warred with or enslaved each other.
Oh, wait...
That's what you get when your welfare state is non-existent. 😉
I haven't had the news on today. Has CNN been reflecting on how Thanksgiving represents ecological genocide in the ritualized slaughter and devouring of a flightless, genetically modified frankenturkey?
"No one washes a rental car."
Ever get OCD?
Women had to cook and clean for other women's husbands, and they "deemed it a kind of slavery."
See? The Pilgrims invented slavery!
Aah. Thanksgiving is now here. With a big heaping helping of myth to go with the turkey and mashed potato myth.
I bring this up now because this same sort of thinking nearly killed the pilgrims.
Well no. Even if the identical story gets repeated every Thanksgiving that doesn't make it true.
When they came to America, the pilgrims decided to share everything.
The 'Pilgrims' didn't 'decide' anything. It wasn't their land. They were merely indentured tenants on Plymouth Council for New England land. There were 40 'adventurers' - now called shareholders - all residing in England. The Pilgrims were in debt because of the costs of the Mayflower voyage and their contract was that after seven years, if alive, they would receive 100 acres.
The governor of Plymouth Colony, William Bradford, wrote that the pilgrims thought "taking away of property and [making it communal]…would make them happy and flourishing.
No. What he ACTUALLY wrote was - 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.
That is in fact the exact opposite impression as your misquote. And to unfurl what actually happened to create this change - in 1623 - one needs to actually understand something far more interesting and complicated than some bullshit myth.
But enough of the bullshit - here's to the turkey. Pass the mashed potatoes.
Oh stuff your quibbling. They tried communism, it failed, they tried private property, it worked.
Fuck off, slaver. Get over yourself.
" They tried communism, it failed,"
Communism saved their lives. They were on the verge of possible extinction when their neighbors gifted them with much needed and life sustaining food. You have to be pretty thick headed to say that something that saved your life was a failure.
Communism nearly killed them. Moving away from a collective made them productive. Stop your lies, you fucking Marxist traitor.
To each according to their needs, The colonists needed food and they received it. From each according to their abilities. The Indian's surplus of food meant they had the ability to give the food to those who needed it. That's pure Marxist avant la lettre. And it didn't kill them, it saved their lives. And they were never a collective as long as they were part of a money economy, unlike the Indians who were a collective communistic economy.
And they were never a collective as long as they were part of a money economy, unlike the Indians who were a collective communistic economy.
OMFG! Imagine discussing the Wampanoag and not even being aware of Wampum!
The Indians didn't have a money economy. They didn't have shops to buy food or clothes and they weren't paid in wages for work done. They had a communistic collective way of distributing property.The money economy with all its subservience and bowing and scraping before one's betters was the way of the English and the rest of Europe.
Been reading up on your Rousseau I see.
Is everything you believe false?
Europe had a money economy, the Indians didn't. You can't deny it. The collectivized communistic, avant la lettre, Marxist Indians saved the lives of the colonists, and you are resentful, seemingly, rather than thankful.
A lot of good communism did the Indians.
"A lot of good communism did the Indians."
A lot of good all that bowing and scraping before the King did the colonists. It was the commie Indians who saved them from starvation.
The Natives had to plant, grow, cultivate, harvest, and shuck the crop before they could give anything to the Pilgrims. That involved use of labor, implements, and land, the latter a.k.a. real property.
Also, the Native Americans had to have knowledge of the flora, fauna, and geographic conditions of the land before they could pass that along to the Pilgrims. That presupposes free minds to explore these rhings and pass on the knowledge from generation to generation.
Hence, it was "Free Minds and Free Markets" of a sort that saved the Pilgrims. Send your checks and accolades to the estate of Lanny Friedlander.
The economy of the Indians, whatever you want to call it, certainly did allow for more freedom and autonomy than that of the colonists, still enthralled to Europe's money economy.
The experience that was had in this commone course and condition, tried sundrie years, and that amongst godly and sober men, may well evince the vanitie of that conceite of Platos and other ancients, applauded by some of later times; -that the taking away of propertie, and bringing in communitie into a comone wealth, would make them happy and florishing; as if they were wiser then God. For this comunitie (so farr as it was) was found to breed much confusion and discontent, and retard much imployment that would have been to their benefite and comforte. For the yong-men that were most able and fitte for labour and servise did repine that they should spend their time and streingth to worke for other mens wives and children, with out any recompence. The strong, or man of parts, had no more in devission of victails and cloaths, then he that was weake and not able to doe a quarter the other could; this was thought injuestice. The aged and graver men to be ranked and equalised in labours, and victails, cloaths, etc., with the meaner and yonger sorte, thought it some indignite and disrespect unto them. And for mens wives to be commanded to doe servise for other men, as dresing their meate, washing their cloaths, etc., they deemd it a kind of slaverie, neither could many husbands well brooke it.
So, a longer reading of the original evinces exactly what Stossel wrote. Should we speculate as to why Jeffy went out of his way to gaslight readers of the comments?
How about - that turkey don't fly?
No matter how loudly progressives beat their drum, stick to the facts.
Disagree. Beat the stuffing out of them with their own drumsticks.
The Progressives are waving their Tofurky drumsticks at us like Henry VIII. A real drumstick would knock that flimsy thing apart!
Pepto-Bismol Ad with Henry VIII (1982)
https://youtu.be/wsX_CvtawMA
Evidently, the Progressive Henry VIII likes 'em young like our own Hair-Sniffer-In-Chief.
Pepto Commercials for the non-boy-band set!
Pepto-Copter! Fuck Yeah!
https://youtu.be/srXN2wnhmJ4
And here's what's probably happening at a lot of our tables right now!
Vintage Pepto-Bismol Commercial .wmv
https://youtu.be/h3TrwRcsvQs
No it doesn't. It explains what happened when the Wessagusett Colony (all men, no families, food acquired via theft from Indians, their only work focus was whatever could be sold back in England) fell apart in March 1623 and everyone from there moved to Plymouth. And the conflict between the Pilgrims and the Westons/Gorges/Plymouth Council and their absentee landlord notions.
That was the proximate reason for Bradford to break the indenture contract and allocate some land to individuals.
They broke the communal system because it was nowhere near as profitable.
One could make a progressive argument that had they maintained that socialist system, and its low profits, that few more would want to travel to the New World. But the profits tempted more Europeans to settle there. To the detriment of the indigenous peoples. Such as the Iron Curtain border defenses. The fences were not there to keep intruders out. They were there to keep people in. Not many want to move there because they would not benefit from increased productivity.
So the end of the communal system helped shepherd in the conquering of the natives.
All I know is that I'd like to find the bastard who started the tradition of Black Friday and kick the shit out of him. It's not Black Friday itself I mind so much, it's the TV news coverage of it like it's never happened before and it's purely coincidental that TV has a vested interest in driving shoppers into a frenzy of gluttony, avarice, greed and consumer hyper-excess. Now go buy your wife a Lincoln Navigator and a diamond tiara for Christmas you worthless puke.
Every kiss begins with Kay.
Plus six months salary, or whatever rip-off formula the diamond merchants tell their male customers. They ain't gettin' me to take the bait! MGTOW forever!
LINCOLN Navigator?
I'm not entirely sure where you live but I think it's stuck 10, maybe 20 yrs. in the past.
Yes, Black Friday is a thing. No, not everybody still observes it. Somebody will recognize that people do lots of online shopping on Monday and call it "Cyber Monday" and there will be a smaller craze about that. Somebody else will get the idea that, if deals can be had on the Monday after Turkey Day, why not all week or month long? And then Black Friday will be relegated to the boomers who like to hang out in malls. You can look forward to "Blackout Wednesday" towards the end, or after the Black Friday craze. Unclear how COVID will affect any/all of the above.
Try not to break the space-time continuum with this information.
Black Friday will be relegated to the boomers who like to hang out in malls
Sorry, 'boomers' is a chiding derogatory term for older, out of touch people. Targeted at but not specifically limited to Baby Boomers.
OK, Boomer. 😉
It's too late for that (relatively speaking.)
Philo T. Farnsworth's creation has gone into the past and due to mutations created by the wormhole, the ability to invent has crossed species:
TurkeyTV Intro from Nickelodeon
https://youtu.be/in3bUsvQ9sk
JerrysKids, I hope you get as much a kick out of these as I do every Thanksgiving:
Papa Charlie Anderson's prayer in the movie Shenandoah
https://youtu.be/IzzyZ1M-kVU
Bart Simpson Ruins Thanksgiving
https://youtu.be/jWXYESqTgTc
You forgot
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=lf3mgmEdfwg
I swear to God I thought turkeys could fly
I had posted that on one of the other threads some days ago, but it's always worth watching, especially today. For that, I give my Thanks to you. 🙂
It was a Truely underrated show
With Wokeism spreading like wildfire, I wonder if we're going back to the days when someone could get fired for saying "booger" on the radio.
Happy Thanksgiving everyone!
I'm grateful we can still post unfiltered opinions here, and for everyone committed to increasing liberty and discussing ideas freely, even those with whom I often disagree, from whatever political party they tend to side with.
Hopefully we can get back to debating ideas and policies on their merits, likely effects, and relation to the principles of liberty, rather than reflexive personal or team attacks.
Ahhh you want reason in like 2010
"Sharing things and 'public' property sound nice, but only private ownership reliably inspires people to conserve and protect."
Ah, so, obviously, privatized waterways and lands are being more conserved than the national parks are.
Even so, it's pretty precarious to place an entire rigid dogma in the hands of this bald-faced dogmatic assertion. Especially one that sounds so fucking stupid a 5 year old could figure out why it's bullshit.
You may protect your own property (not that you'd be required to), in a libertarian regimen, but you're going to ruin other people's property until profit is maximized, if that's what it takes. Tell me why not.
Certainly not because you think humans have enough foresight to form collective property rights.
I present publicly owned and maintained Kensington Avenue in Philadelphia:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Vzs6sUjo2ms
Utonypia fo sho
Yep, Tony. The water in my PUR Brand water pitcher is Lead-free, unlike the water from the public system in Flint, Michigan. Also, I've never heard of private pools on fire like Lake Erie was in the Seventies.
The Free-Market response to cries of fallen Eco-Edens is another battle cry:
Paul Lynde--Hollywood Squares--"Hey, Culligan Man!"
https://youtu.be/q1sv3siINdc
"Ah, so, obviously, privatized waterways and lands are being more conserved than the national parks are."
National parks are not public property in the same sense as the commons, the public doesn't have free rein to go use the land in whatever manner they see fit, so really its just another form of private property. Of course I suspect you are aware of this and are being deliberately disingenuous
"Public" means "Government-Owned," whether for parks or for schools or libraries or anything else. To the extent that Government ownership allows for all to use it, "The Tragedy of the Commons" applies.
“You may protect your own property (not that you'd be required to), in a libertarian regimen, but you're going to ruin other people's property until profit is maximized, if that's what it takes. Tell me why not.”
Uh, because the other person had property rights, which are very libertarian.
Some of the worst ecological disasters known to man were perpetrated on public commons by government agents.
Communal situations, entered into voluntarily, can be successful. Consider the monasteries of medieval Europe. Those living there shared an ideology. They also gave up the right to marry and father children. It's human nature to prioritize the well-being of a spouse and offspring over that of the community.
Voluntary communalism isn't anti-libertarian, though it isn't for me. It's the mandatory kind we have to guard against.
I spoke with a Nun once about the Monastic Orders in The Roman Catholic Church. She and her fellow Nuns still had to work jobs in the outside Secular Capitalist world, giving the wqges to The Church, of course. Also, Monks were and are famous for selling wine, baked goods, and hand-crafted items to the outside world, again, with proceeds going to The Church. Hence, the Monastic Orders really are parasitic upon Secular Capitalism, just like other Communistic "experiments."
Is it parasitic if they make stuff to trade for money? That sounds like free enterprise. Is the Amish selling baskets and blankets and cheese parasitic?
What is parasitic is that The Church and it's Monastic Orders use Free-Market Capitalism while condemning it and teaching it's flock to "love not the world, nor the things of this world."
It is also parasitic for the Amish to shun modern technology while still accepting the money of the "English" (their word for "Unbelievers") who earned the money with the help of that same modern technology.
“Sharing things and "public" property sound nice, but only private ownership reliably inspires people to conserve and protect.”
Bullshit!
Enforced regulations designed to conserve protect us all from the greed of men.
Privatization protects nothing as the greedy consume, get rich, destroy and move on to greener pastures.
The only conservation you would support is of Lebenstraum and (temporarily) the "human resources" needed to conquer it!
We seen how well that turned out! You assholes didn't even spare poor Donald Duck!
Donald Duck--"Der Fueher's Face" 1943
https://dai.ly/x7yrqf8
So c'mon, Misek! Sing Along! Just follow the bouncing Zyklon-B Pill!
Spike Jones--"Der Fuehrer's Face"
https://youtu.be/lWF8iRCan7I
What are Jews without their lies about perpetual bogeymen persecuting them?
Do you want to talk about shitstain Jews with your long history of publicly claiming persecution via a holocaust in many nations besides Germany hundreds of times since before WW1. Fuckwits faking cancer to extort people on a go fund me website.
These people are habitual holocaust liars. Does the Nazi version in which it is illegal to demonstrate the lie in every nation where it allegedly occurred any more credible?
Here are hundreds of examples of Jewish holocaust liars.
http://wearswar.wordpress.com/2017/10/31/repeated-claims-of-6-million-jews-dying-decades-before-hitler-vs-ignored-soviet-death-camp-tolls/
Serious question: Do you ever NOT think about Jews?
You trolls bring it up and get beat with it.
Stick around, Great One! He might go on a kick about Sammy Davis, Jr. 😉
Why do you say "your long history?" Are you playing Howard Stern's radio game "Who Is The Jew?" with host Kurt Waldheim? Well, you lost, I'm not Jewish and Kurt don't even give booby prizes except for maybe one-way train trips through the Balkans to Auschwitz or Dachau.
I guess reading comprehension is not a strong suit for "Aryan Pure Supermen."
Those headlines and news stories from 1869 to 1945 didn't say 6,000,000 Jews were massacred each time, as the Web writer alleges. Rather, prior to 1945, they each give a count of 6 million live Jews in various scenarios facing various disease-bourne or man-made governmental threats.
I may need prescription glasses, but I can use a zoom feature on a smartphone or desktop. I also smell some Meisterbrau-scented piss on my back which I don't especially like. I may be kinky, but I'm clean.
Yeah, holocaust lying Jews officially claimed 166 times of the imminent peril of 6 million of their fuckwit brethren in many countries over a span of 100 years, to piss and moan for money and accommodation.
Nazi Germany is merely the 167th time they lied, this time for reparations and The theft of Palestine.
It’s long past due, time to tear down your lying holocaust memorials, recognize fake holocaust literature as hate speech, recover all reparations with interest and bring the perpetrators of murderers of falsely accused Nazi war criminals to swift justice..
Thats only a start to clean things up.
The fact that you advocate for holocaust lying Jewish shitstains gets you lumped in with them.
Just a few excerpts from the link
“Six million men and women are dying from lack of the necessaries of life; eight hundred thousand children cry for bread. And this fate is upon them through no fault of their own, through no transgression of the laws of God or man; but through the awful tyranny of war and a bigoted lust for Jewish blood.”
Glynn’s article was printed on October 31, 1919. The allegation was the “threatened holocaust of human life” was occurring after the Great War.[6]
The Chicago Tribune on July 20, 1921 published an article headlined: “Begs America Save 6,000,000 in Russia.” This article claimed that “Russia’s 6 million Jews are facing extermination by massacre. As the famine is spreading, the counter-revolutionary movement is gaining and the Soviet’s control is waning.” The United Jewish Campaign of New York in 1926 set a fundraising goal of $6,000,000 to help the “dying” Jews of Europe. On December 29, 1931 a Montreal newspaper ran a baseless claim from Rabbi Stephen Wise that 6 million Jews faced starvation in southeastern Europe.[7]
The New York Times on May 31, 1936, published an article headlined “Americans Appeal for Jewish Refuge.” This article appealed to Great Britain to “…throw open the gates of Palestine and let in the victimized and persecuted Jews escaping from the European holocaust.”
Embedded within the lying holocaust jew statements are some telling perspectives.
First” the counter-revolutionary movement is gaining and the Soviet’s control is waning.” tells us that Jews perceived waning Jewish Bolshevik communist Russia control to be a threat” Jews for communism, secret police and the Cold War.
Secondly, “ throw open the gates of Palestine and let in the victimized and persecuted Jews” tells us that 6 million Jews were waiting at the perceived “gates of Palestine” to be ushered in by the allies a full 12 years before the Middle East conflict. So much for the Arabs being the aggressors.
Thats only a start to clean things up.
The fact that you advocate for holocaust lying Jewish shitstains gets you lumped in with them.
Well, if standing against denial of the reality of lersecution, tyranny, and genocide lumps me in with the Jews, then I say: L'Chaim and Shabbot Shalom, Bitch!
Please try and bring the "clean up" to the streets soon. Judging from the Kyle Rittenhouse ruling and the ruling against the lynch-mobbers in Georgia, it won't end well for you. Most likely you'll be the subject of the "clean up."
Clean up starts with sharing the recognition of irrefutable truth.
It’s obvious that the facts I’ve stated are irrefutable. It’ll take the brainwashed some time to discard their cherished bogeyman stories.
But the truth is unchanging and has time on its side, as do I.
Your denial and inability to refute is both lame and entertaining.
It ended better for them than the other guys.
Have a great Thanksgiving everyone. God bless America
Someone as the Native Americans how respect for their property rights went.
Have you asked them? I ask this of you as someone with Native American ancestry.
And shouldn't the poverty, alcoholism, drug addiction, dysfunction, and mortality rates among Native Americans further underscore the necessity of respecting and defending private property rights?
The caribou or bison didn't respect private property rights. It's a bit much expecting anything different from those who depended on them.
I'm saying the plight of Native Americans came from policies that disregard private property rights i.e. expropriation, the Reservation System, Welfare Statism, etc.
War of aggression against the Indians couldn't be conducted without complete disregard to property rights, private or otherwise.
Yeah, holocaust lying Jews officially claimed 166 times of the imminent peril of 6 million of their fuckwit brethren in many countries over a span of 100 years, to piss and moan for money and accommodation.
Nazi Germany is merely the 167th time they lied, this time for reparations and The theft of Palestine.
It’s long past due, time to tear down your lying holocaust memorials, recognize fake holocaust literature as hate speech, recover all reparations with interest and bring the perpetrators of murderers of falsely accused Nazi war criminals to swift justice..
That only a start to clean things up.
No need to say it twice. It's not like you'll live twice to do the "clean up" twice.
Shitstain losers faking holocausts are dirty, and deserve more than a little cleaning up.
Kyle delivered. Me, I just lay in wait.
You should have stuck with that because you can’t argue worth shit.
If anyone wants to consider and review the evidence, probably for the first time In your lives, that soundly refutes the false holocaust narrative you can read the book,
Breaking the Spell: The Holocaust, Myth & Reality.
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/23629458-breaking-the-spell
Poor Bernie Madoff.