As a native-born American who has lived in many parts of the world, I know there is much to be thankful for. Perhaps this year, as never before, there are reasons to reflect upon the bountiful blessings Americans share during annual celebrations of Thanksgiving.
While most Christians consider Thanksgiving to be a religious holiday, others recognize the day for its broad secular appeal that unites all Americans. As in all events, that divine intervention may not have been at work on the first occasion for this celebration.
As it turns out, the abundant harvest that gave cause for worshipful praise apparently had more worldly causes. Indeed, the first day of Thanksgiving associated with the Pilgrims was made possible by changes in the economic system that had guided activities in their colony.
To fully understand this assertion, one has to consider an accurate account of the Pilgrims' progress. In the first instance, some historical misperceptions need to be cleared up.
Every American schoolchild knows that in November 1620 a band of 103 Pilgrims landed in Massachusetts and founded New Plymouth. Many Americans seem to recollect, or were taught incorrectly, that the Pilgrims celebrated the first Thanksgiving with their Indian friends.
While there was a three-day feast that took place after a shooting party in the fall of 1621, it was not the first Thanksgiving Day. Although many Pilgrims owed thanks to local Indians who taught them indigenous practices, like fertilizing corn with fish, the original Thanksgiving did not include their aboriginal friends.
The harvest that was celebrated at the first Thanksgiving occurred later, after the Pilgrims abandoned a form of agricultural socialism they had implemented upon their arrival. In large part, the first Thanksgiving was a celebration of the bounty arising from the pursuit of individualism and incentives associated with free markets.
Background for understanding Thanksgiving Day is found in records kept by the governor of the colony, William Bradford. He informs us that the Pilgrims' English sponsors arranged for all crops and trade goods to be held "in the common stock" from which they would be supplied, reflecting the religious beliefs of the colony.
As with many other recorded applications of communalism, there were disastrous results. Governor Bradford wrote that this experiment reflected a belief that common ownership of property would allow the colony to flourish. Instead, it was soon found that communal sharing resulted in unintended consequences. The Pilgrims, as the Soviets were to discover several centuries later, found that individuals work harder under an incentive system that allows them to maintain and enjoy the direct fruits of their labor.
The Pilgrims' initial experience mirrored the unfortunate experiment in Jamestown, where half the original settlers either starved or fell victim to disease. With the Pilgrims facing the prospects of a famine in the early months of 1623, they called a meeting to look into ways to escape near-certain death by starvation.
Their decision was to abandon their communist arrangement for the distribution of goods on the basis of "from each according to their means, to each according to their needs." Instead, according to Bradford, from then on, "they should set corn every man for his own particular need."
These new arrangements provided only a limited form of property rights, since land continued to be held commonly. Nonetheless, each family had a parcel of land to cultivate, and they could keep what they grew, even if they could not deed the land to their heirs. (Similar agricultural reforms were initiated in China in 1978 under the direction of Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平). After centuries of cycles of famine, China is now self-sufficient in many foods and is a net exporter in others.)
Although it was recorded that the American colonists exhibited a dramatic increase in their industriousness, these were offset the following summer by the effects of a drought. Following the convictions of their religious beliefs, they offered appropriate contrition for their sins. Then the drought broke and their harvest was saved.
And so it was that the Pilgrims set about to celebrate a "way of thanksgiving," that Americans continue to celebrate to this day. Their new economic system that relied upon individual efforts insured that they would be able to produce enough food for the future. This system continues to thrive within the system of freedoms enshrined in America's national heritage.
Thanksgiving, as celebrated today, should not be limited to a remembrance of the Pilgrims' offering of thanks to their God for the rain that saved their crops. It is also an opportunity to remember the institutions of individualism, private property and liberty that made Americans great and provide the means for this greatness to continue into the future.
Christopher Lingle is a professor of economics at Universidad Francisco Marroquin and global strategist for eConoLytics.com.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS