It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
"all profits & benefits that are got by trade, traffic, trucking, working, fishing, or any other means" were to be placed in the common stock of the colony, and that, "all such persons as are of this colony, are to have their meat, drink, apparel, and all provisions out of the common stock." A person was to put into the common stock all he could, and take only what he needed.
in 1623 Bradford abolished socialism. He gave each household a parcel of land and told them they could keep what they produced, or trade it away as they saw fit
The harvest of 1623 was different. Suddenly, "instead of famine now God gave them plenty," Bradford wrote, "and the face of things was changed, to the rejoicing of the hearts of many, for which they blessed God." Thereafter, he wrote, "any general want or famine hath not been amongst them since to this day."
originally posted by: Gothmog
What a piece of "work" (you know what I really mean) . Where in HADES was this found ? Or just made up as they went along.
Seems like a lot of folks are falsely chiming in "stuff" (same as the other ) . Everyone knows the Native Americans pulled the colonists tail out of the fire. Taught em what to grow , and how to grow it. Shared knowledge and supplies with them. Another vain attempt to rewrite history
So to re-cap, William Bradford wrote down that before 1623 they lived under socialism and were dropping like flies of starvation, and after 1623 when Brandford wrote down they converted to capitalism that they never had to worry about food again. What does that mean to you? That William Bradford is a liar, or converting the economy to capitalism was purely coincidental? Are you aware that every single socialist nation has the same problem of abject squalor and not just initial colonial America? That is a lot of coincidences. I think opposing viewpoints being looked at as an unlimited stream of strange coincidences is not going to get you to an accurate world view. When the facts disagree with you, that is a problem.
originally posted by: dawnstar
what's more likely is that it took a few years for the colonists to adapt to their new surroundings and find ways to survive and produce in the new world, with the help of the natives.
I find it kind of ironic that the natives who were helping these colonists learn what food to grow and such, were for the most part living a the rather communal life that you claim the colonist couldn't. especially when one considers that the land as it was was rather plentiful in game and such.
although, I would venture to guess that the indians teaching them how to take only what you need from the earth and leave the rest for the future did go rather contradictory to the goals of the big business entities that were backing those colonies hoping for a massive profit!!!