William Bradford (by Cyrus Dallin)

As Americans prepare to celebrate the great Thanksgiving feasts held at Plymouth colony beginning in 1621 and especially in 1623 (and also the earlier Thanksgiving feast held at Berkeley Plantation in the Jamestown colony in 1618), they might want to remember Thanksgiving for a harsh lesson that the Pilgrims learned about the high cost of political vanity.

William Bradford, who succeeded as Governor of the Plymouth colony after Governor Carver and his wife died, was facing disaster. When the Pilgrims had set up their colony, they had no such thing as property. Instead they held all the land in common, and they held every person's work in common as well. In short, theirs was a command economy.

As every historian knows, half the colonists died in the winter of 1620-1621. But what most people might not realize was that the failure of the command economy was responsible for those deaths. True, the Little Ice Age was still in full force. But the succeeding winters were not necessarily any more harsh than that first winter. More to the point, Bradford readily acknowledges, in his history Of Plimoth Plantation, that simple lack of provision was to blame--and that the unrealistic expectations of a command economy were responsible for that lack of provision.

Plato

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 recompence. 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 equalised 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 [tolerate] 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 of those relations that God hath set amongst men, yet it did at least much diminish and take of 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.

That course was to reintroduce the concept of property, an inherently private thing, to people's lives. To that end Bradford made every householder responsible for his own provision, and divided the land into individual parcels, awarded to each household in proportion to its size.

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.

Bradford's comment about human nature is timeless. As he said, philosophers since Plato have guessed that a total commonwealth--which is to say, communism--would work better than respect for private property. But Will Durant observed as far back as 1935 that "while communism helped men cope with poverty, it could never help get men out of that poverty." More to the point, every communist regime, beginning with the old Soviet Union, has boasted of a project to remake mankind into what they called "New Communist Man," a creature above all considerations of self. Bradford had seen an attempt at just such a thing fail tragically and had abandoned the attempt.

And so in 1623, Bradford had much to be thankful for. Today we would be wise to remember his lesson, and not try yet again an experiment that has never succeeded, nor will ever succeed.

The above quotes are taken from Bradford's own history Of Plymouth Plantation, quoted also at Swarthmore University. Spelling and punctuation have been modernized.

Like this article? Want to be notified of more articles? Click Subscribe, above.