[jeffkrol]

Nothings sacred.......

Bradford did get rid of the common course — but it was in 1623, after the first Thanksgiving, and not because the system wasn’t working. The Pilgrims just didn’t like it. In the accounts of colonists, Mr. Pickering said, “there was griping and groaning.”
“Bachelors didn’t want to feed the wives of married men, and women don’t want to do the laundry of the bachelors,” he said.
The real reason agriculture became more profitable over the years, Mr. Pickering said, is that the Pilgrims were getting better at farming crops like corn that had been unknown to them in England.
As for Jamestown, there was famine. But historians dispute the characterization of the colony as a collectivist society. “To call it socialism is wildly inaccurate,” said Karen Ordahl Kupperman, a historian at New York University and the author of “The Jamestown Project.” “It was a contracted company, and everybody worked for the company. I mean, is Halliburton a socialist scheme?”

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/21/weekinreview/21zernike.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1

[mikemike]

I'm thankful that this woman isn't 1 septuagenarian heartbeat away from controlling a massive nuclear arsenal.

[YT]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJd_vm9VhpU[/YT]

[MRRiley]

What a totally oblivious nitwit!

[GeneV]

Nothings sacred.......

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/21/weekinreview/21zernike.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1

When I see blurbs like that, I imagine how holidays were discussed in the Soviet Union--with a health seasoning of anti-capitalism.

If we want to go back to the system of our founders, we would need to become economic colonies ruled by an aristocracy and monopolistic multinational business. Hmmm.

We should save this for after we enjoy the holiday.

[Parallax]

Apparently, nothing is sacred. So far Gene is the only one that has seen the irony of posting a thread
complaining about politicizing Thanksgiving, in a (often heated) political discussion forum.

[jeffkrol]

Apparently, nothing is sacred. So far Gene is the only one that has seen the irony of posting a thread
complaining about politicizing Thanksgiving, in a (often heated) political discussion forum.

Dang, I had a really good attack on how it was the Puritans (numerically overwhelming the original colonists) that subverted the colonies and really screwed the Am-ind's over........

After 1630, the members of Plymouth Colony found themselves becoming a minority, due to the growing number of Puritans arriving and settling near present-day Boston. Barely tolerant of other Christians denominations and viewing the native peoples largely as savages and heathens, the Puritans were also soldiers and traders who had little interest in friendship or cooperation with the Indians. Under this new leadership, the English expanded westward into the Connecticut River Valley. In 1637 they destroyed the powerful Pequot Confederation. In 1643 the Mohegan defeated the Narragansett in a war; with support from the English, they became the dominant tribe in southern New England.[12]

Between 1640 and 1675, new waves of settlers arrived and continued to force the native peoples westward. While the Pilgrims had normally paid for land, or had at least asked for permission, most Puritans simply took land for themselves[citation needed]. In 1665 the Indians of southern New England were simply in the way of the English, who had no desire to learn to survive in the wilderness. Catching fish and the trading of commodities had replaced the colonists’ trading of furs and wampum from previous years. The population of the native peoples continued to decline, due to recurring epidemics in 1633, 1635, 1654, 1661 and 1667.[12]

OR how the Politicizing" (and BTW propaganda) goes on today......
How Property Rights Saved the Pilgrims After the First Thanksgiving|OpenMarket.org

As Gillespie and Bragg note, on Thanksgiving we should “give thanks to the true patron of this holiday feast: property rights.”

Or the myths..........
OUPblog Blog Archive Thanksgiving: Behind the Pilgrim Myth
Thanksgiving - Not the Pilgrims' feast - Pratt, KS - Pratt Tribune
The "indians" of thanksgiving, lest we forget (or more likely what do you know about "them")
Wampanoag people - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

After 1640, John Eliot and other Puritan missionaries proposed a "humane" solution to the Indian “problem:” converting native peoples to Christianity. The converted Indians were resettled in fourteen "praying towns." The system of organization into sedentary townships was especially important because it demanded the renunciation of native practices such as migratory hunting patterns and their adoption of a more traditionally English way of life. By settling them into established towns, Eliot and his colleagues hoped that under the tutelage of Christian ministers, Native Americans would adopt English – and therefore “civilized” – practices like monogamous marriage, agriculture, patriarchal households, and jurisprudence.[16]

The motivations of New England Native American societies, to convert to Christianity were numerous and varied. The high levels of epidemics among the Native Americans after the arrival of the Europeans certainly contributed. In addition to bringing about a dramatic restructuring of political hierarchies, the massive death toll caused a certain level of disillusionment in Native American societies. It has been suggested that the survivors experienced a type of spiritual crisis because their medical and religious leaders could not prevent the epidemic.[17] Conversely, the English settlers were often unaffected by the sickness, which contributed to a belief that the English god was more powerful than their own.
"Old Indian Meeting House," built in 1684 in Mashpee, is the oldest surviving Native American church building in the United States

In addition, by the latter half of the seventeenth century, alcoholism had become rampant among males in some southern New England ethnic groups and inspired many to turn for help to Christianity and Christian discipline systems. Thus Christianity became a refuge of women from male drunkenness. With its insistence upon temperance and systems of earthly and heavenly retribution for drunkenness, Christianity held great appeal to natives attempting to fight alcoholism, especially to those women whose close male relatives were affected.

The level of conversion to not only Christianity but also English cultural and societal norms – conversions demanded of the Native Americans – depended on the town and region. In most of Eliot's mainland “praying towns,” converts were expected to follow English laws, manners, and gender roles in addition to adopting the material trappings of English life. Rather than a system in which those who did not conform were punished, however, Eliot and other ministers relied on praise and rewards for those who did.[18]

The Christian Indian settlements of Martha's Vineyard were noted for a great deal of sharing and mixing between Wampanoag and English ways of life. Wampanoag converts often carried over cultural attributes such as dress, hairstyle, and governance. These Martha's Vineyard converts were not required to attend church and often maintained traditional cultural practices such as mourning rituals.[19] The Martha's Vineyard Christian Indian settlements were much more a mixture of Wampanoag and English Puritan cultures than only English Puritan values.

Other than religious conversion, Eliot's “praying Indians” did not experience a high degree of cultural assimilation, especially in the area of law and justice systems. In pre-colonial societies, the sachem and his or her council were responsible for administering justice among their people. However, converts increasingly turned to religious authorities for help in resolving their legal quarrels as the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries progressed. Christian ministers and missionaries supplanted traditional leaders as the legal authorities among Christian Indians.

The conversion of Native Americans to Christianity had an especially great effect on female converts. As previously discussed, many Wampanoag women were attracted to Christianity because it offered a chance to free themselves and especially their male relatives from alcohol abuse. Christianity altered the gender power structure as well. English ministers such as John Eliot attempted to introduce a patriarchal society to their Wampanoag converts, both inside and outside the home. In many cases, however, these attempts failed because Wampanoag women – especially Wampanoag wives – were, in the majority of cases on the Vineyard, the spiritual leaders of their households.[20] Additionally, they were also more likely to convert than Indian males. Experience Mayhew, a Puritan minister, observed that there were “a greater number of their women appearing pious than of the men among them.” However, this tendency towards female conversion created a problem for missionaries intent on establishing traditional patriarchal family and societal structures among the Native Americans: in order to convert the men, these Puritans often had to place power in the hands of the women. In general, English ministers agreed that it was preferable for women to subvert the patriarchal model and assume a dominant spiritual role than it was for their husbands to remain unconverted. Experience Mayhew asked “[How] can those Wives answer it unto God who do not Use their utmost Endeavors to Perswade and oblige their husbands to maintain Prayer in their families [?]”[21] Thus, the lives of some Wampanoag women changed greatly after their conversion to Christianity because the gender roles prescribed by pre-colonial society were often altered or replaced by English customs, while others remained practitioners of traditional Christianity.

for later:
http://www.mediaite.com/online/rush-limbaugh-outraged-obamas-thanksgiving-de...ive-americans/
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2010/11/25/2010-11-25_rush_limbaugh...=news/politics