Every generation, people want to try new things and it's nice. But landownership can and has been and good thing in a way that just going back to "anarchy" wouldn't work. E.g. creation of ghettos, who gets to farm the best land, etc.

So then the suggestions are that the land are owned and "managed" by the state apparatus. 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.

I'm open to better suggestions but just shitting on land ownership seems easy and unproductive.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 11 points 10 months ago (5 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 (4 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.

[–] 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.

load more comments (2 replies)

load more comments (23 replies)