Both imperial Russia and Qing China were plagued by frequent famines, I don't see how it is damnng that the PRC and the USSR had a famine in their early years of existence (after they'd fought long and drawn out wars), when they then never had famines again.
There a millions of people starving in the us today, in Europe, in africa, in south America, in the middle east, in India. There is more than enough food, but somehow these capitalist countries have millions starving. The us has kids missing lunch in school, despite food being available in cafeterias.
If one famine once in a region that used to be plagued by famines is too much for you, what does this ever-present famine then mean to you? What system do you suppose we make use of? Surely you cannot be a capitalist, since you are so staunchly against people starving
There are A LOT of problems out there, I agree. There is, however, a difference between destroying a country/regions ability to produce essential and strategic goods (like food, which has very immediate effect) through reckless decisions by authoritarian regimes (then throw in the Holodomor for fun), and inequality & a lack of social safety nets.
Right now, the whole world has, through various efforts, has solved the global food production issue. That the soviets and china managed to solve this aspect of it too is not a win for socialism, especially given the mass starvation that accompanied their efforts, but I see (and correct me if I have misunderstood) you and others holding this up as some kind of tenuous proof of superiority.
Social inequality and the denial of what I believe are basic human rights (food, housing, safety, access to healthcare, and freedom of expression), OTOH, are a continuing problem world-wide. I am much more interested in efforts here - both local, regional, and global.
The holodomor was the famine you doofus. It was also not an action taken deliberately by the Soviet government, and historians and scholars agree that the holodomor didn't target Ukraine specifically - it was instead a famine that.hit the Soviet Union as a result of years of war. Do you not know your hostory?
Right now, the whole world has, through various efforts, has solved the global food production issue.
Right now millions are starving, despite there being more than enough food.
You still haven't answered the question.
That the soviets and china managed to solve this aspect of it too is not a win for socialism, especially given the mass starvation that accompanied their efforts, but I see (and correct me if I have misunderstood) you and others holding this up as some kind of tenuous proof of superiority.
That the soviets and the Chinese managed to eliminate famine in a region that had been plagued by famine since history could account for it, is not an immense accomplishment? Cope. It most certainly is, especially when you bring up the discussion of starvation.
Social inequality and the denial of what I believe are basic human rights (food, housing, safety, access to healthcare, and freedom of expression), OTOH, are a continuing problem world-wide.
Issues that the soviets and the Chinese made far greater dents I to, than anything modern capitalist governments do.
am much more interested in efforts here - both local, regional, and global.
So again, since you care so much about famines, and the current system has constant famines despite ha ing more than enough food available, and the soviets and the Chinese managed to eliminate famine, what system do you support? You surely cannot be a capitalist, since so many people are starving to death every day in capitalist countries. Millions are starving in the us alone. What do you think should be done?
The holodomor was the famine you doofus. It was also not an action taken deliberately by the Soviet government, and historians and scholars agree that the holodomor didn't target Ukraine specifically - it was instead a famine that.hit the Soviet Union as a result of years of war. Do you not know your hostory?
Here is where a disagreement starts. Yes, there was a widespread famine (and not just in Ukraine).. but it was, as recognised by many scholars, made far more deadly in parts of Ukraine by decrees from above. Collectivisation caused the wider famine, and callous decisions resulted in deliberate starvation of some. This is not something anyone should celebrate or diminish, even though the situation vastly improved in later years.
Note: I'm travelling today, so most responses will have to wait. Have a good one.
edit long after the fact: For future readers, here is a ukrainian viewpoint of the Holodomor: https://www.rferl.org/a/historican-anne-applebaum-interview-ukraine-holodomor-famine-stalin/28756181.html
Wow you managed to engage with one single point! Very good, though you still haven't answered my question. You also keep to debating the holodomor, as if I disagree there was a famine or something? I don't, we agree there was a famine. Answer my question.
It's also neat to see you continue to engage in holocaust denial by way of peddling double genocide theory. At no point did the Soviet government deliberately take actions with intent to starve it's population, implying this - and thereby equating it with the holocaust - trivialises the holocaust, as well as spreads misinformation about historical events.
Did the soviets make mistakes? Yes, many. Did the Soviet government intentionally starve it's citizens? No.
This is not a debate about the long-since debunked "deliberate" famine where Stalin personally went around with his big spoon and ate all the grain. What made the famine worse? If you are interested in such a discussion I'd recommend actually looking into the data and the historians interpretating it first. This thread has good and approachable information an excerpt:
Thanks for the links. I've been reading. It is not far off my understanding. It's novel to me that anyone claims that the famine itself was deliberate. I've never heard anyone claiming that before.
Anyway, I noticed that https://lb.ua/news/2010/01/14/19793_nalivaychenko_nazval_kolichestvo_zh.html says 10 million, while https://hexbear.net/post/20004 links to it and claims it says 4 million. I guess the wayback machine should be checked.
My day was long, I'm tired, and there is more to read. I'll have to re-read your previous comments to find the Q that interests you.
I appreciate you taking the time to look into the material I've provided you.
Anyway, I noticed that https://lb.ua/news/2010/01/14/19793_nalivaychenko_nazval_kolichestvo_zh.html says 10 million, while https://hexbear.net/post/20004 links to it and claims it says 4 million. I guess the wayback machine should be checked.
Both imperial Russia and Qing China were plagued by frequent famines, I don't see how it is damnng that the PRC and the USSR had a famine in their early years of existence (after they'd fought long and drawn out wars), when they then never had famines again.
There a millions of people starving in the us today, in Europe, in africa, in south America, in the middle east, in India. There is more than enough food, but somehow these capitalist countries have millions starving. The us has kids missing lunch in school, despite food being available in cafeterias.
If one famine once in a region that used to be plagued by famines is too much for you, what does this ever-present famine then mean to you? What system do you suppose we make use of? Surely you cannot be a capitalist, since you are so staunchly against people starving
There are A LOT of problems out there, I agree. There is, however, a difference between destroying a country/regions ability to produce essential and strategic goods (like food, which has very immediate effect) through reckless decisions by authoritarian regimes (then throw in the Holodomor for fun), and inequality & a lack of social safety nets.
Right now, the whole world has, through various efforts, has solved the global food production issue. That the soviets and china managed to solve this aspect of it too is not a win for socialism, especially given the mass starvation that accompanied their efforts, but I see (and correct me if I have misunderstood) you and others holding this up as some kind of tenuous proof of superiority.
Social inequality and the denial of what I believe are basic human rights (food, housing, safety, access to healthcare, and freedom of expression), OTOH, are a continuing problem world-wide. I am much more interested in efforts here - both local, regional, and global.
The holodomor was the famine you doofus. It was also not an action taken deliberately by the Soviet government, and historians and scholars agree that the holodomor didn't target Ukraine specifically - it was instead a famine that.hit the Soviet Union as a result of years of war. Do you not know your hostory?
Right now millions are starving, despite there being more than enough food.
You still haven't answered the question.
That the soviets and the Chinese managed to eliminate famine in a region that had been plagued by famine since history could account for it, is not an immense accomplishment? Cope. It most certainly is, especially when you bring up the discussion of starvation.
Issues that the soviets and the Chinese made far greater dents I to, than anything modern capitalist governments do.
So again, since you care so much about famines, and the current system has constant famines despite ha ing more than enough food available, and the soviets and the Chinese managed to eliminate famine, what system do you support? You surely cannot be a capitalist, since so many people are starving to death every day in capitalist countries. Millions are starving in the us alone. What do you think should be done?
Here is where a disagreement starts. Yes, there was a widespread famine (and not just in Ukraine).. but it was, as recognised by many scholars, made far more deadly in parts of Ukraine by decrees from above. Collectivisation caused the wider famine, and callous decisions resulted in deliberate starvation of some. This is not something anyone should celebrate or diminish, even though the situation vastly improved in later years.
Note: I'm travelling today, so most responses will have to wait. Have a good one.
edit long after the fact: For future readers, here is a ukrainian viewpoint of the Holodomor: https://www.rferl.org/a/historican-anne-applebaum-interview-ukraine-holodomor-famine-stalin/28756181.html
Wow you managed to engage with one single point! Very good, though you still haven't answered my question. You also keep to debating the holodomor, as if I disagree there was a famine or something? I don't, we agree there was a famine. Answer my question.
It's also neat to see you continue to engage in holocaust denial by way of peddling double genocide theory. At no point did the Soviet government deliberately take actions with intent to starve it's population, implying this - and thereby equating it with the holocaust - trivialises the holocaust, as well as spreads misinformation about historical events.
Did the soviets make mistakes? Yes, many. Did the Soviet government intentionally starve it's citizens? No.
This is not a debate about the long-since debunked "deliberate" famine where Stalin personally went around with his big spoon and ate all the grain. What made the famine worse? If you are interested in such a discussion I'd recommend actually looking into the data and the historians interpretating it first.
This thread has good and approachable information an excerpt:
I doubt you will look into it though, since you so far continue to be.more interested in condescending cheap shots.
Here's another one you won't engage with
Double genocide [1] [2]
Thanks for the links. I've been reading. It is not far off my understanding. It's novel to me that anyone claims that the famine itself was deliberate. I've never heard anyone claiming that before.
Anyway, I noticed that https://lb.ua/news/2010/01/14/19793_nalivaychenko_nazval_kolichestvo_zh.html says 10 million, while https://hexbear.net/post/20004 links to it and claims it says 4 million. I guess the wayback machine should be checked.
My day was long, I'm tired, and there is more to read. I'll have to re-read your previous comments to find the Q that interests you.
I appreciate you taking the time to look into the material I've provided you.
That's odd. Good catch!