• حمید پیام عباسی@crazypeople.onlineOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      9 hours ago

      It is so funny how you people can’t read. There is nothing about any other side but the British here. You just need to interject your bullshit. Thanks for announcing a new useless account to block.

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      11 hours ago

      Not really.

      The British exported food during famine to enrich themselves off the backs of Irish, Scottish, Indian, and other colonized peoples. The Soviets exported grain during the 1930s Soviet famine to trade for agricultural machinery to end a naturally occurring famine, and redirected grain to alleviate the famine where they could.

      The British slaughtered colonized peoples, both armed and unarmed. The Soviets put down reactionary counterrevolutions that were armed.

      The British colonized territories, erasing any autonomy and running their economies on extraction. The Soviets were anti-colonial, and generally helped set up socialist democracy, liberating the working classes.

      The British frequently arrested and executed people even for simple backtalk against colonialism and imperialism. The Soviets censored, and did execute people when evidence of an anti-soviet force was brewing to overthrow socialism.

      If you erase all of the context, you can find similarities. However, just like you can say Nazis and communists are both “violent,” what matters is who that violence is used against, and for what aims. It’s necessary to investigate beyond surface level comparisons.

    • jobbies@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      2 days ago

      Scotland has forgotten that we had the famine too. That and the clearences lead to thousands of Highlanders migrating to Glasgow. Today the West of Scotland has some of the most deprived areas in Europe.

      Ireland understands and has confronted its generational trauma. We swept ours under the rug and the consequences are stark.

      Ireland, Scotland, Wales and the north of England were getting fucked by the aristocracy long before the empire.

    • shawn1122@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 day ago

      Churchill, one of the most revered figures in the Anglosphere, celebrated the export of food away from people who were starving. He would respond to questions on it mockingly. In India’s case he took a type of joy in it since he hated people who weren’t white. Was a different time sure, but he was particularly vile when it came to this.

      • RiverRock@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 day ago

        Churchill wins the Lovecraft Award for “outstandingly racist even by the standards of an absurdly racist society”.

  • Razen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    2 days ago

    And they still think they were civilising people. There is a reason with West is associated with hypocrites. Atleast teach your population that colonisation was wrong no matter how you look at it.

    • Napster153@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      18 hours ago

      They call it White Guilt and still spin the narrative to blame non-Europeans and especially non-Anglos, I believe.

      You can’t really reason with a raider. He will only understand force.

      • sangeteria@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        22 hours ago

        And he represented the liberal wing of South Asia’s decolonial movement! Imagine what the left wing would have said lmao

  • AngryRedHerring@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    See, right off the bat I’m like “wow, I didn’t know the Russians did the same thing as the British with the potato famine”

  • Zerush@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Few nations without corpses in the basement in their history. Important the current behavior, the history of other countries can’t be used as valuation without hypocrisy, only if they had not learned from it.

    • FrowingFostek@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      20 hours ago

      iight, I been on here for a while now. Idk if there’s some kind of beef with Pugjesus and Cowbee but, I feel like I vibe with them both.

      Anyone have the tea?

      • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        12 hours ago

        PJ is a social fascist, essentially. PJ nearly always posts anti-communist memes that range from horribly misleading to outright disinformation, and will frequently misquote Marx or other leftists to justify opposing communism and supporting imperialism. Further, PJ stalks my account from time to time and tries to grab content for the Nazi bar they moderate, so at a personal level I’d say I’m not a fan.

        • FrowingFostek@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 hours ago

          Huh, I guess I haven’t paid too much attention to that. I’ve only ever engaged with their historical posts that they’ve put up. I’ll probably have to look up social fascistism. I’ve used Umberto’s 14 points, is it kinda like that?

          • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            11 hours ago

            I’m not a fan of Eco’s 14 points as an identification of fascism. They are common characteristics of fascism, but not the definition of it nor do they explain the rise and fall of fascism. Fascism is better seen as capitalism in decay, as the methods of colonialism applied domestically. The Nazis essentially tried to colonize Europe, treating the rest of Europe the way Europe treats the global south.

            Social fascism is essentially a term for those that want to retain imperialist welfare states, bribing the working classes with welfare and siding with imperialism and neocolonialism to fund them, rather than socialism. The German SPD hated the communists, and worked with the Nazis to kill the KPD off, enabling the rise of Nazism in Germany. It’s no coincidence that PJ loves the German SPD.

    • Maeve@kbin.earth
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      Along with CM002, Rimu, dude, the quok guy, eyekaytee, Goat, Lund, gedelliyah… The whole .world mod/admin team, along with .works, and now midwest.social, several anime, more I’ve probably not mentioned.

      • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        25
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Put it this way: I don’t think PJ is a fed, but I think the fact that he’s the feds aren’t paying him is wage theft.

  • Weydemeyer@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    I think the “exported food during a famine” part deserves some examination. Because doing this in itself may or may not be justified.

    For the Soviet Union, I have heard this as an anti-communist talking point for both the famine that occurred during the civil war in the 20s and the famine of the early 30s. In both cases the Soviet Union was totally justified in exporting food during a famine. Why? Because having food in itself doesn’t necessarily solve a famine. You need inputs (like fertilizer) and capital (like farming equipment). For the Soviet Union, agriculture was essentially still pre-modern. They were seriously lacking both in both famines. The decision to export was not “let’s make some side cash by starving our people”. Rather it was recognizing that selling X units of food today would yield X+Y units in the future by using the proceeds to improve your agricultural situation. Food was swapped for inputs and capital. It’s an incredibly difficult decision to make, but it’s the rational one and in the end saves more lives.

    But the British in Ireland in the late 1848? That was just allowing the invisible hand of the free market to do its thing. Produce sold for more in England so they shipped it off, because England was significantly richer than Ireland. You can say the famine wasn’t the intentional result of the British government perhaps, but you can’t say it’s not the expected and natural outcome of free market capitalism.

    And then the British in Bengal? I’m not quite as familiar I’ll admit but IIRC that was just the Brits needing more food for themselves so they took it from India, consequences for Indians be damned.

    • shawn1122@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      With regard to Bengal and India as a whole:

      British policy resulted in the death of 100 million people during the Raj. The Bengal famine is just one example and was not even the most deadly.

      In Bengal:

      • Fearing a Japanese invasion through Burma, the British enacted a scorched-earth policy in coastal Bengal. They confiscated or destroyed tens of thousands of boats, bicycles, and carts (the lifeblood of the local transport and fishing economy) and seized rice stocks so the Japanese couldn’t use them. This completely destroyed the rural economy.

      • Stockpiled food strictly to feed military troops, civil servants, and industrial defense workers in Calcutta. Rural peasants were entirely abandoned to the market.

      • To pay for the war, the British printed massive amounts of paper currency in India. This caused the price of rice to skyrocket by up to 600%, completely pricing out rural laborers.

      • When the scale of the famine became global news, other countries offered to help. Canada offered to send ships loaded with 100,000 tons of emergency wheat. The United States also offered food aid. Churchill’s government turned them down, refusing to provide or allow the shipping vessels required to transport the grain to India.

      • To protect Britain’s international reputation during World War II, the British colonial government heavily censored the Indian press. They banned newspapers from using the word “famine” or publishing photographs of the skeletal bodies lining the streets. It wasn’t until a British editor of an English-language newspaper in Calcutta broke ranks and published gruesome photographs that the British public—and the world—realized the scale of the horror.

      When British officials in Bengal like Leo Amery petitioned Churchill for aid he responded with:

      • Stating it was the fault of Bengalis for breeding like rabbits.

      • Asking why Gandhi hadn’t died yet.

      • Stating that he “hated Indians” as they are a “beastly people with a beastly religion”

      To which Amery replied: “I am by no means sure whether on this subject [India] Winston is really quite sane… I told him that I didn’t see much difference between his outlook and Hitler’s.

      I don’t fault you for a second for not knowing. Most people don’t know this history because they didn’t want you to know. But it’s all available in the public record if anyone wants to learn more.

    • Mokopa@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      England was richer than Ireland? That implies Irish people had some level of choice… Ireland was a colony of the British empire and as such were responsible for it’s citizens and the Irish people had no say in where the crops were sold to. Irish people, by and large, couldn’t afford those crops anyway and so relied the potatoes they grew. When that failed for consecutive harvests, they starved because the landowners continued to sell the other food sources abroad rather than helping. The invisible hand of the market has little or nothing to do with it because they could never have bought the crops anyway, it was just greed and cruelty.

      • cornishon@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        2 days ago

        The invisible hand of the market has little or nothing to do with it […], it was just greed and cruelty.

        To be fair, greed and cruelty is what the invisible hand of the market is when push comes to shove.

  • ThirdConsul@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    1 day ago

    Top one is about Bengali Famine? Or the Irish one? Because I am sure you only meant one of those and forgot about the others.

    My favourite (didn’t make to top 5) is when UK betrayed Poland after WW2 and gave it to Soviets because - I shit you not, that was one of the arguments Churchill gave - they needed Polish soldiers in UK to repopulate peasant villages.

        • Grapho@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          19
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          Claiming that all people are like this everywhere is tantamount to genocide apologia because it implies that there’s absolutely nothing out of the ordinary about genocide. You’re basically stating this is the natural order of things and people are gonna just do this whenever sufficient political power is amassed.

          That is absolutely false and ahistorical, genocides are thankfully not as common as white westerners like to pretend they are (just because they’re always involved in them), and it’s not because there haven’t been other societies in a position to enact them.