Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site dciem.UUCP
Path: utzoo!dciem!mmt
From: mmt@dciem.UUCP (Martin Taylor)
Newsgroups: net.politics.theory
Subject: Re: Re: (micromotives & macrobehavior)
Message-ID: <1689@dciem.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 21-Sep-85 14:31:20 EDT
Article-I.D.: dciem.1689
Posted: Sat Sep 21 14:31:20 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 21-Sep-85 20:17:50 EDT
References: <3476@topaz.UUCP> <28200078@inmet.UUCP> <755@cybvax0.UUCP> <10414@ucbvax.ARPA>
Reply-To: mmt@dciem.UUCP (PUT YOUR NAME HERE)
Organization: D.C.I.E.M., Toronto, Canada
Lines: 51
Summary: 


>The *only* case of starvation in the face of food surplus that I know of was
>the starvation of the Kulaks by Stalin in the 30's.  In fact, the only cases
>of famine in this century have been in Marxist or Socialist nations, as far as
>I know.  Do you know of any cases of famine in capitalist nations?
>
>                                -- Rick.
Not knowing how to define "capitalist", I can't say, but the Enclyclopaedia
Britannica (1968 edition, so it's a bit out of date) lists the following
20th century famines:
1899-1901 Famine in India; 1,000,000 perished.  The government spent
          L10,000,000 on relief, and at one time there were 4,500,000
          people on the relief works.
1905      Famine in Russia (Feudal or capitalist?)
1916      Famine in China (Capitalist?)
1921      Famine in USSR (Not the Stalin-induced one)
1932-33   Famine in USSR (Ukraine, I suppose)
1943      Famine in Bengal; about 1,500,000 perished (capitalist)
1960-61   Famine in the Congo quickly relieved by the United Nations.

The Encyclopaedia has this to say about Indian famines:
========
Successive Indian Governments acquired much experience in the handling
of famines.  Nearly all famines are relatively local and the main problem
is the bringing of food from neighbouring areas.  Transport is a key to
the problem.  The building of the Indian railways in the middle of the
19th century, for example, led indirectly to a great saving of life.

A principle of British famine administration in India was that gratuitous
relief should not be given.  If money could be brought into the famine
area, then food would automatically follow through the normal trade
channels.  The organization of large emergency public works was the
means adopted to overcome the shortage of money.  Elaborate plans were
drawn up in all areas where famine was possible and works opened as
soon as signs of scarcity arose.  There are criticisms in detail of
this emthod (for instance, persons doing manual labour need more food),
but on the whole the measures prevented major disasters.
========

Compare this with Carnes' note on the handling of the Irish potato famine.
The same economic principles apply -- no direct relief, and you get only
what food you can pay for -- but the state took on itself the obligation
of giving people work for which they could get paid (and which had a
useful end result).  The disastrous consequences of laissez-faire
economics were thus ameliorated by "socialist" techniques, much as the
WPA helped ameliorate the worst effects of the depression in the 1930s.
-- 

Martin Taylor
{allegra,linus,ihnp4,floyd,ubc-vision}!utzoo!dciem!mmt
{uw-beaver,qucis,watmath}!utcsri!dciem!mmt