I'd like some answers about Soviet starvation

I'd like some answers about Soviet starvation.

My questions are essentially:

How many people starved because of soviet incompetence?

How many people starved because of natural famines?

Why was it so difficult to ensure every prole had bread?

Other urls found in this thread:

gen.lib.rus.ec/book/index.php?md5=4F13589002A3DFA4B0139B332FEF54AD
theguardian.com/world/2008/jul/29/food.internationalaidanddevelopment
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

1. Its estimated at 3-5 million, I don't know if there's an exact number, it was nation-wide so contrary to popular belief it didn't effect the Ukrainians exclusively and if some of the research on the impact on the famine in Kazakshtan is correct even disproportionately.
It certainly wasn't the result of a genocidal policy borne out of a hatred of Ukrainians. As for the question of how many people starved due to incompetence that's hard to answer, I don't know how you would even put a number on that unless you had a mono-casual explanation that attributed the deaths to Soviet incompetence.

2.In all of Russia's history? There were famines every 2-3 years over the course of millennia and the 1933 wasn't even unique in being the only one in the 20th century. Some famines, arguably more severe, have been claimed to have hit the USSR during the Russian Civil War. Famine during WWII obviously existed but was the manmade result of the Nazi occupation and the damages caused by war–so not a natural famine either. The widely publicized 1933 famine was a natural famine according to Mark Tauger there literally just wasn't enough food to go around thanks to the weather conditions.

3. Not enough food. The Soviet Union was under a Western embargo at the time and was prohibited from trading gold, oil or other precious metals but still expected to pay loans for industrial equipment that they needed to carry out industrialization. They attempted to buy grain using gold in Persia (Iran) to alleviate the famine but by the time they could secure that deal it was really too late and it wasn't much use.

Thanks.


I should have narrowed my questions to Stalin's rule, my mistake.

Not that the Soviet government was perfect or anything but "Soviet incompetence" is largely an American meme

what's the book?

More proof of captalism's superiority!

looks like Grover Furr blood lies

Yep, that's it and you can get it here: gen.lib.rus.ec/book/index.php?md5=4F13589002A3DFA4B0139B332FEF54AD

A lot of people don't like Furr for this or that reason but Bloodlies is a damning critique of the work of one of the most respected academic anti-communists of our time and imo worth checking out for all interesting primary sources he packs in it.

if you look at the history of communist countries they are amazing at making you hungry.

stalin
mao
the uns in worst korea

Mmm, hit me up with some more of that capitalist famine prevention mate.

The soviet faminees arose due to a combination of urbanization/industrialization and a crack-down on Ukraine due to their anarchist sympathies.
To Stalin, it was much better to let a huge portion of his population starve than to risk having a powerful base of political dissendence.

theguardian.com/world/2008/jul/29/food.internationalaidanddevelopment

Source? (this is a trick question)

Or you might just be a retard who doesn't realize China holds the record for most famines in history and Russia comes close, and both countries stopped having them after communism.

at least 400 gorillion

Ach wech untermench! Are you forgetting the 99999 gorillion ethnic germans and ukrainians starved?!

This. China especially has had trouble dealing with food supplies due to their huge populations and relatively advanced technology. Chinese political society is so strict in part because land usage had to be exactly managed, because any sort of sizable social disruption could set off a chain reaction costing millions of lives.

It's important to keep that in mind when Mao and his twenty billion get brought up because at the time China was still basically a feudal state and, not to diminish his apparent fuck ups, but the nature of China at the time meant any kind of social imbalance would be magnified tremendously.

Mao "Just kill the birds" Tse-Tung
Mao "just make steel in your backyard" Tse-Tung

Not an argument

...

Millions died and it was nearly all because the state wanted them to. The state bureaucracy knew all about the famine and the numbers dying, going so far as to close down the state statistical departments to prevent any information from coming out (which is why this is a contested subjected). Faced with mounting pressure from below, the state finally gave in started providing relief measures. The quest for industrialization was only one part of it, the other was a class war against the peasantry and they failed in their attempts at getting rid of the peasants. It ended in a quasi-stalemate where peasant property became protected under Soviet law. The peasantry/private property owners became a real power in the Soviet economy despite the small amount of land they owned because of this.

Nice source you got there fam

This misses the fact that Stalin demanded cadres requisition seed grain from starving peasants. Stalin starved people through direct actionit's not just incompetence vs "natural" famine

Soviet collectivized agriculture was a terrible system. In their attempt to create socialist agriculture the Soviets replaced the traditional peasant collective with a state capitalist agri-business. It had all the problems of capitalism and none of the benefits of socialism. That's how the USSR went from an exporter of food under the NEP to the world's biggest importer under Brezhnev.

They were the largest exporter and people still starved.

You are literally defending capitalism in it's most indefensible form

And you are defending Stalin's purges and artificially caused famine because "muh capitalism". Both are terrible.

probably 10-20 million people if not more (Holla Forums is v sensitive about this issue)

Stalin was crushing dissent son, you gotta use force to get respect from people who only understand force. That's not an endorsement, but it is a pragmatic explanation of why these regimes are the way they are. All things considered, people tend to demand the style and quality of treatment they receive (knowingly or unknowingly). Weak, authoritarian plebs bring about strong, authoritarian leaders. Strong plebs bring about no leaders or weak leaders

Kek, I've had Holla Forums cite Bloodlies to me based off the figures presented in the wikipedia article for it.


Stupid smallcase poster.

so every dictator or oligarchy ever?

They exported while people starved under Tsars. Under the NEP, with its voluntary collectivization program, agriculture boomed. The agricultural boom was a problem, since factory workers and soldiers (the Bolsheviks' primary base of support) resented the peasants' relative wealth. Stalin's forced collectivization was an attempt to capture the surplus produced by the peasantry and redistribute it to workers & soldiers. Instead he destroyed the surplus and crippled the Soviet agricultural sector.

Obviously it's wrong to export to export food while your people starve; I'm a Holla Forums poster I didn't think I needed to clarify that.