Red Scare

I recently began reading A People's History of the United States by Howard Zinn, and the first chapter alone is enough to keep my mind racing for weeks. What has really got me thinking is his description of the 17th century Iroquois tribe. According to Zinn, who I am fairly confident can be trusted as a legitimate source, this tribe was made up of 5 smaller tribes, and it consisted of thousands of people who all spoke the same language. A group of thousands who speak the same language, that is spread across a large portion of northeastern America, and is, by all practical definitions, unlinked by accesible communication? To a technology dependent, 21st century American, that is a pretty impressive feat. But what I find most impressive is this--they shared.

An account from a French Jesuit priest, dated in the 1650s, reads: "No poorhouses are needed among them, because they are neither mendicants nor paupers. . . . Their kindness, humanity, and courtesy not only makes them liberal with what they have, but causes them to possess hardly anything except in common."

This was a civilization that was--by and large--untouched, unspoiled, and untainted by the outside world. These people existed as they had for generations before them, which leads me to wonder. . . is this human behavior at its most basic level? Is it humanity's natural tendency to share with one another, to take care of one another?

If so, it would appear that some form of what we generally refer to as "communism" is in our blood, and I have to say--would it be such a bad thing? I mean, greed, materialism, and "progress" haven't seemed to work out too well for most of the world.

I hope Senator McCarthy's ghost doesn't come after me for this.