this post was submitted on 16 Jan 2024
2482 points (97.8% liked)

Memes

45726 readers
821 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 11 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Now we have a few famines in history to show us how gaining favor in a political system is not the best way to manage the land.

Doesn't that also mean The Irish famine shows private land ownership isn't the best way to manage land?

[–] Jax@sh.itjust.works -2 points 10 months ago (2 children)

The potato famine was caused by a new type of blight being brought from the Americas back to Europe.

I don't see how being beaten by a novel disease has anything to do with private land ownership.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 12 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

The blight affected all of Europe, yet only Ireland had severe famine because while the French government bought food for their citizens, the English government publicly declared the invisible hand of the free market would fix the famine.

Similarly the Ukraine famine was crop failure due to bad weather conditions that affected all of Eastern Europe. The crop failure wasn't caused by the Soviets. Yet only Ukrainians died because the Soviets shipped Ukrainian food to Moscow in the same way Irish died because of free markets shipping Irish food to London. (Yes, Ireland was still a net exporter of food during the famine.)

When natural disasters occured it's, "Millions died because of communism." Yet when millions die under the free market it's only the natural disaster and not capitalism.

[–] meyotch@slrpnk.net 10 points 10 months ago (1 children)

They grew enough potatoes to feed the population in spite of the blight losses. However said taters fetched a higher price abroad. So fuck the poor, I guess.

[–] Jax@sh.itjust.works 6 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Yeah ok, I didn't consider that.

Hard to argue with that.

[–] exocrinous@lemm.ee 3 points 10 months ago

Also they would have had a higher diversity of crops if not for landlords. Landlords were extorting farmers and the only way the farmers could pay the bills was with the vegetable that had the highest margin. Farmers were forced to switch from other crops to growing potatoes by their landlords.