Thanksgiving Should Worry Today's Socialists
The only reason we celebrate the holiday with lots of food is because the Pilgrims learned—the hard way—that socialism doesn't work.
People are turning to socialism. Two-thirds of Americans ages 18-29 hold a "favorable view" of it.
New York just elected a "proud socialist" mayor. My video explains why his ideas would make things worse.
Of course they would! Socialism has never worked. Anywhere!
Yet Seattle too just elected a socialist mayor.
"Let's give socialism a chance," said a student writing in The Student Life, a college newspaper.
Americans should know we already gave socialism a chance. The only reason we get to celebrate Thanksgiving with lots of food is because the Pilgrims learned (the hard way) that socialism doesn't work.
When they came to America, they first tried sharing land. Gov. William Bradford decreed that each family would get an equal share of food, no matter how much they worked.
The results were disastrous.
Few Pilgrims worked hard, claiming "weakness and inability," wrote Bradford. "Much was stolen."
The same plan in Jamestown led to starvation, the death of half the population, even cannibalism.
Learning from their mistakes, the Pilgrims tried a different approach: "Every family was assigned a parcel of land," wrote Bradford. Then, he noted, Pilgrims "went willingly into the field."
That's capitalism.
Soon, there was an abundance of food. So much that the Pilgrims and Natives could celebrate Thanksgiving together.
This abundance has only grown.
We'll feast on vast amounts of food this Thanksgiving that, despite media clickbait, is much more affordable than it used to be. Today Americans spend only 10 percent of our disposable income on food. When I started working, it was twice that.
This abundance didn't come with people in government manipulating supply chains, or comrades dictating prices and quality.
It comes from millions of people practicing capitalism, making billions of voluntary exchanges.
It comes from free people willing to innovate and take risks, in an attempt to make more money by serving customers better than the next guy.
This process almost always works better than government central planning.
Without central direction, farmers, truckers, and grocers move food across the country with remarkable coordination and efficiency.
Stores compete so fiercely that they sell turkeys at a loss, just to get you through their doors.
Global competition drives airlines to lower their fares so it's cheaper for you to fly home for Thanksgiving.
And despite the media's alarms about climate change creating food shortages, global agricultural output sets record highs year after year.
Government didn't orchestrate any of that. Government can barely manage a DMV line.
Markets create abundance because they quickly reward people who figure out how to make things cheaper, faster and better.
That's what I'm thankful for this Thanksgiving.
The alternative looks a lot like Venezuela, Cuba, North Korea.
While we enjoy the gifts that free enterprise brings, the Associated Press reports that in Venezuela, "every meal is a struggle."
NBC, before going on to write silly stories that practically promote socialism, admits that in Cuba, residents face "daily blackouts lasting up to 20 hours, mounting piles of uncollected garbage, and severe shortages of food and basic goods."
When politicians try to control the economy, the abundance you get is scarcity.
We live in a country where choices overwhelm us, and shortages are something we read about in the news.
It should make us grateful. Not just for the food, but for the free enterprise system that creates it.
This Thanksgiving, as you go around the table to say what you're thankful for, take a moment to thank the farmers, truckers, pilots, grocery workers, engineers, entrepreneurs, and most importantly, the economic freedom that makes it all possible.
Let's not let socialist idiots kill it!
Abundance doesn't happen by accident. It won't continue if we forget where it came from.
COPYRIGHT 2025 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
Learning from their mistakes, the Pilgrims tried a different approach: "Every family was assigned a parcel of land," wrote Bradford. Then, he noted, Pilgrims "went willingly into the field."
That's capitalism.
Yes, that's capitalist exploitation, say collectivists. It's greed personified. Food is a basic human right! Denying food according to need is oppression.
Those are some of the tenets of Takesgiving.
Just how do you propose that this “basic human right” be acquired and distributed? Government confiscation? Farms tended by slaves? Socialists are long on demands of other people’s assets and resources but short on practical answers.
I'm sorry this is totally laughable. I wasn't aware we get assigned plots of land in capitalism. I thought the top 1000 landowners own over 1/6th of the privately owned land in the US and that was "capitalism" and those who can't afford land can get fucked. Being given equal plots of land by the government to use on subsistance farming sounds more like the agrarian socialism of Mao?
We're not fucking third graders being spoonfed a PragerUSA commercial that oversimplifies history and economics to have a dumbed down narrative of what "socialism" and "capitalism" is.
Most "socialists" in America are just young social democrats who think "capitalism is bad" because they can't afford healthcare or housing, a basic human need. Nor can they afford higher education, which they need to be able to afford healthcare and housing. And they are pissed because money, land and power keeps flowing to the top of the totem pole and we are currently living in an authoritarian plutocracy run by billionaire scumbags to benefit themselves and their corporations at our expense.
Most of them want America to be more like Scandinavia (the highest QOL countries in the world, and fundamentally capitalist economies with strong safety nets), not like the Soviet Union, Maoist China, North Korea or whatever scare story you want to conjure up about totalitarian socialism and mass death.
"can't afford healthcare or housing ... higher education ... pissed because money, land and power keeps flowing to the top of the totem pole" ... "and we are currently living in an authoritarian plutocracy run by billionaire scumbags to benefit themselves"
And the BIG misconception there is the ideological inability to identify Government as that very ?corporation? where all the blame sits.
It should be obvious by the amount of 'government' in "healthcare, housing and higher education".
It should be obvious by D.C.'s per-capita getting 5-TIMES more than any other state in the union.
It should be obvious by the very fact the more 'affordable' they try to make it the more 'unaffordable' it gets.
Only [D]emocratic [Na]tional So[zi]alist brain-washing Propaganda prevent people from opening their eyes to what is blatantly obvious. It never was or ever has been 'corporation' or 'capitalism'. It has ALWAYS been the curses of [Na]tional So[zi]al[ism].
Too many people calling for the government to break up Big Tech don't realize that government is the biggest baddest monopoly of them all.
"I wasn't aware we get assigned plots of land in capitalism."
Taking an unworked resource and improving it to the point it produces, then owning the proceeds is capitalism.
" I thought the top 1000 landowners own over 1/6th of the privately owned land in the US and that was "capitalism" and those who can't afford land can get fucked."
Yes funny what happens when the government seizes great swaths of land or performs a taking through onerous land-use regulations. We suddenly see the interests of an entrenched few align with those land-use regulations and concentration of wealth. The real funny bit is that idiots like yourself will call this "Capitalism" while pining for even MORE land-use regulations that make concentration of capital even MORE likely.
"Most "socialists" in America are just young social democrats who think "capitalism is bad" because they can't afford healthcare or housing, a basic human need."
You moron. Most "Social Democrats" are:
1) Spoiled youth in big cities who never had to face consequences of their decisions in their pampered lives and don't understand why they have to produce something others value to put food on the table.
2) Old hippie Boomers who got rich off of their own hard work and think they can tell others how to follow their exact plan for living to achieve the same results.
And by the way, the fact that Housing and Health Care are basic human needs is the reason WHY they should be rendered to the market instead of the government. When governments take over basic needs, shortages skyrocket. Compare the US's mostly-market-oriented food production to countries that tried socializing their food production. As Stossel notes, food (as a percentage of income) has gone down year over year (much like the cost of electronics and other low-regulated goods) while everything the government has focused on (college tuition, healthcare, housing, finance) just seems to become out of reach for average workers while the rich get richer.
I wonder at what point a fool like yourself will figure this out. Will it be before or after you are starving in a ditch?
"As Stossel notes, food (as a percentage of income) has gone down year over year "
Farm bankruptcies.
"According to the U.S. Courts, 361 Chapter 12 bankruptcy cases were filed in the first half of this year, marking a 13% increase over the same period last year."
Hey look, it's mtrueman here to change the subject.
The horror!
Yup! more non-responsive retorts.
Is this the part where you name drop some philosopher you barely understand under the hopes that an appeal to authority will keep people from noticing you are incapable of forming your own coherent argument?
(Spoiler: We all notice)
I already referenced Orwell (the Indians who again have been memory holed.) And Conrad (the horror!) Maybe you didn't notice.
I was talking about this thread, and perfectly on time, there you are with the name drop. What a bore.
(And yes, we still noticed that you couldn't argue your way out of a wet paper bag, precious.)
I don't argue. I prefer changing the subject, dropping names, and boring people.
I'm sorry this is totally laughable. I wasn't aware we get assigned plots of land in capitalism.
Yes - the annual Thanksgiving screed here is laughable. If only because the land was already privately owned (ignoring the Indian claims) - by the Virginia Company of Plymouth and its shareholders in London. The Pilgrim were at best tenants or indentured servants who were under CONTRACT. The land was no more their land to divvy up than a tenant is free to sell their landlord's house and property. The contract stated that they would each receive 100 acres - in seven years (May 1627 - 5.5 years after that first Thanksgiving and 4 years after the Pilgrims had already divvied up that land) - if and only if they were still alive then (which was not at all a priority of the landowners - only the tenants).
There is a very interesting real history behind why the Pilgrims decided to break that contract. But apparently 'the Pilgrims were commies until they learned better' sells better.
Thank Goodness Stossel is still with Reason!
Another year, another column on the History of Thanksgiving where North Korea is featured more prominently than the role of the Indians who again have been memory holed. Tendentious garbage.
Feel free to write your own biased history. But that would require work. It's easier to whine.
You seem to resent my comment. I didn't mean to hurt your feelings, but I really don't give a shit. I simply point out the Red Erasure coupled with the Red Baiting.
Which story about the Indians? The ones present during the first Thanksgiving, or the generations and generations and generations of Native Americans who were busy migrating, killing and fighting over that land before the first European settlers arrived?
Which story are you going to tell, mtrueman? The poor Wampanoag noble savages of 1621, or the rival Narragansett who they forcibly prevented from settling on these lands? Or the many other people in the greater Algonquian ethno-group who would regularly fight over all this land for 10,000+ years prior to the Europeans' arrival? Where is their claim on the narrative and on your historical scoreboard?
We don't hear about these lost tribes because, while they mattered in their time, their impact on history is largely gone. To the extent that you can mourn any tribe, it is largely because they were the Last Men standing when the next Last Men to stand arrived on the scene. This has happened to countless tribes and peoples since time immemorial, and the only reason European settlers pique your ire is that you are a deluded narcissist who feels so guilty that he has amounted to nothing of worth in this world, that he has to blame it on some original sin of the current society you live in.
"the rival Narragansett who they forcibly prevented from settling on these lands"
It is noteworthy that the whole reason the Wampanoag worked with the Settlers was that they were very near to being wiped out by the rival tribe. Had the settlers arrived a decade later, mtrueman would very likely complaining that the Narragansett got no more than a mention in the footnotes of history, ignorant of the Wampanoag who had been erased even from that history, and yet still strangely convinced of his own mental superiority.
"Which story about the Indians? "
If you have to pick one, make sure it's a story that depicts the Indians in a poor light. You know, in keeping with the spirit of the season.
"How terrible it is that we have forgotten these Indians I refuse to talk about. How could it have happened?"
I doubt that Stossel has forgotten the role of the Indians in Thanksgiving. He's erased them because they are inconvenient to the narrative he is presenting here. The same one he presents every year. Red erasure, red baiting.
"If you don't give an obsequious land acknowledgement for any tangential story, you are engaged in red erasure herpidy derp."
When discussing Thanksgiving at Reason, any mention of North Korea is worth 2 obsequious land acknowledgements.
John Stossel's annual Thanksgiving screed against socialism. John has a hard time understanding young people interest in socialism. Maybe it the fact that President was holding a Great Gatsby party while he was withholding food stamp benefits. Maybe it's the fact that college graduates are having hard time finding jobs because AI is taking up a lot of the entry level work. Maybe it's because young people are not getting houses until they are 40 and Elon Musk just got a deal that could make him a trillionaire. Why can't young people be more like pilgrims?
"Maybe it the fact that President was holding a Great Gatsby party while he was withholding food stamp benefits"
This right here is why young people have such an interest in socialism. Trump did nothing to withhold food stamp benefits. They were withheld- and given back solely by Democrats. But because people like M4E refuse to see any responsibility for their actions or the actions of their ostensible allies, they will always have a boogieman to blame for their self-imposed misery.
Yes, the President is blameless, as always. The fact is that the guy who talked deals refused to deal with the Democrats. The public knew this and most of the blame for the shutdown went on the President and the Republicans.
Here is the ONLY original source about that first celebration of 1621. From Mourt's Relation - published in London in 1622 -
"our harvest being gotten in, our governor sent four men on fowling, that so we might after a special manner rejoice together, after we had gathered the fruits of our labors; they four in one day killed as much fowl, as with a little help beside, served the Company almost a week, at which time amongst other Recreations, we exercised our Arms, many of the Indians coming amongst us, and amongst the rest their greatest king Massasoit, with some ninety men, whom for three days we entertained and feasted, and they went out and killed five Deer, which they brought to the Plantation and bestowed on our Governor, and upon the Captain and others. And although it be not always so plentiful, as it was at this time with us, yet by the goodness of God, we are so far from want, that we often wish you partakers of our plenty."
That first harvest was entirely the result of Squanto teaching the Pilgrims (all city dwellers) how to plant. Roughly half the original Mayflower passengers died that first winter/spring - from 102 down to 53 or so by the time the first supply ship brought supplies (and 37 additional settlers) in Nov 1621 (after that harvest celebration which was probably Sept/Oct). So that first celebration was roughly 1/3 Pilgrims and 2/3 Indians. Probably more since I suspect Indian women and children were also there.
Of course it didn't become called 'Thanksgiving' until that Mourt's Relation publication was rediscovered in the 1840's and the holiday became a competitive settlement mythology (Plymouth v Jamestown) that was part of the Civil War contest.
Happy REAL Thanksgiving
I think Israel should have her own Thanksgiving. The first Zionist immigrants were Lithuanian tailors living in kibbutzim, They had no experience in cultivating in a dry climate and food was not plentiful on their communal farms. That changed when local Christian and Muslim fellahin took them in hand and showed them the ropes. An Israeli Thanksgiving might be an appropriate humane gesture to recognize a debt of gratitude. They could institute the holiday today and still beat the American record by a hundred years.
Corporate Socialism doesn't work.
You clearly don't own a piece of Argentinian debt.
I think socialism started in Eden: "Adam, here's your share of the apple."
Between the subsidies for and all the other govt interference (FDA, USDA, etc.) with food producers, I'd hardly call it capitalism.
If it works it’s called capitalism. If it doesn’t work it’s called socialism.
Thank you for the charming parable of the benefits of hard work! The colony at Plymouth did well after surviving their first disastrous winter.
But I wonder if there wasn't more going on at Jamestown than socialism. Wikipedia states "a number of the original settlers were upper-class gentlemen who were not accustomed to manual labor." I fear that slightly undercuts the anti-socialist narrative.