Doubtless you have all seen this before, but it needs repeating, (and it is free content, being long out of copyright)
Governor Bradford, repeatedly re-elected governor of the Puritan settlement tells us in his journal “Of Plymouth Plantation”:
All this while no supply was heard of, neither knew they when they might expect any. So they began to think how they might raise as much corn as they could, and obtain a better crop then they had done, that they might not still thus languish in misery. At length, after much debate of things, the Governor (with the advise of the chiefest amongst them) gave way that they should set corn every man for his own particular, and in that regard trust to them selves ; in all other things to go on in the general way as before. And so assigned to every family a parcel of land, according to the proportion of their number for that end, only for present use (but made no division for inheritance, and ranged all boys & youth under some family. This had very good success ; for it made all hands very industrious, so as much more corn was planted then 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.
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 then 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, with out any recompense. The strong, or man of parts, had no more in division of victuals & cloths, then 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  equalized 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 brook it. Upon the point all being to have alike, and all to do alike, they thought them selves 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 it self. I answer, seeing all men have this corruption in them, God in his wisdom saw another course fit for them.
So the true lesson of thanksgiving is that socialism leads to famine and slavery.
This, I think, is why anglosphere leftism has lasted considerably longer than the others: Because being Godly men, they were humble, and so eventually realized that leftism really stinks, whereas the usual reaction of leftists to this unwanted discovery is to start executing more people, setting children on fire in front of their mothers to force their mothers to reveal where the seed corn is hidden, crucify starving children for eating grass when they were supposed to be working, and rip the baby out of pregnant woman, pour petrol inside her, and set her on fire in order to punish her husband for thinking dangerous thoughts.
These days, however, they are no longer Godly men. Their response to the crimes of Aristide, and some of their fantasies such as “10:10, no pressure”, suggest that a return to form is increasingly probable. Zimbabwe and the Congo show the Cathedral in action in places far from their center of power. In the Congo, Cathedral forces ( Forces Armées de la République Démocratique du Congo) are notorious for terrorizing hostile populations by killing women using genital impalement with large objects and sexually mutilating both men and women. That is an army that is 100% armed and paid by the Cathedral, answerable to a government 100% installed by the Cathedral and completely dependent on Cathedral money and UN forces. So far, however, the Cathedral has been pretty civilized, indeed exaggeratedly and absurdly civilized, when operating closer to home.
You can, however, tell that terrorizing hostile populations in the Congo with sexual impalement by large objects is Cathedral policy because the New York Times, when it does not piously avert its eyes, will piously tell you that militia men are the ones doing it, which lie reveals mens rea. Not that the entire Cathedral is going along with this, but those that don’t go along are reluctant to fuss overly loudly. More like murmuring quietly.