What's new

Bengal famine of 1943

chharoonahmad

FULL MEMBER

New Recruit

Joined
Jul 26, 2010
Messages
70
Reaction score
0
Hi

I'm not really sure where this thread should be placed. So, if you think this doesn't belong here, move it where it should be. Thanks.

I couldn't understand the bold part. Could you please help me with it? And I think Bengal was also devastated by famine during the administration of Clive of India.

From Wikipedia article on the famine:
The Bengal famine of 1943 is one among several famines that occurred in British-administered Bengal. It is estimated that around 3 million Indians died from starvation and malnutrition during the period making the number of Indian deaths higher than the two world wars, the entire independence movement and the massive carnage that followed Partition of India.

Amartya Sen holds the view that there was no overall shortage of rice in Bengal in 1943: availability was actually slightly higher than in 1941, when there was no famine. It was partly this which conditioned the sluggish official response to the disaster, as there had been no serious crop failures and hence the famine was unexpected. Its root causes, Sen argues, lay in rumours of shortage which caused hoarding, and rapid price inflation caused by war-time demands which made rice stocks an excellent investment (prices had already doubled over the previous year). In Sen's interpretation, while landowning peasants who actually grew rice and those employed in defence-related industries in urban areas and at the docks saw their wages rise, this led to a disastrous shift in the exchange entitlements of groups such as landless labourers, fishermen, barbers, paddy huskers and other groups who found the real value of their wages had been slashed by two-thirds since 1940. Quite simply, although Bengal had enough rice and other grains to feed itself, millions of people were suddenly too poor to buy it.

Wikipedia: Bengal famine of 1943 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
These are the groups who do not grow rice for themselves, but exchange with their labour/fish/other service. When rice got too costly only those who grow it for themselves(landowners) or those whose wages rose (matching inflation) could afford it. Income of landless agricultural farmers did not rise, in fact their service was eliminated in some case.
 
These are the groups who do not grow rice for themselves, but exchange with their labour/fish/other service. When rice got too costly only those who grow it for themselves(landowners) or those whose wages rose (matching inflation) could afford it. Income of landless agricultural farmers did not rise, in fact their service was eliminated in some case.

Thanks. The fishermen, labourers, etc. didn't have ask someone else to raise their income. Why wouldn't the fishermen start selling fish at higher price? Why didn't the labourers start selling their labour at higher rate? Please guide me.
 
Thanks. The fishermen, labourers, etc. didn't have ask someone else to raise their income. Why wouldn't the fishermen start selling fish at higher price? Why didn't the labourers start selling their labour at higher rate? Please guide me.

Bro, I am not economist. I am just assuming that the price of rice went up so fast, they could not increase their rates. If it was a situation like normal inflation, then they would have got chance to increase their rates.

People started hoarding rice, cutting on expenditure on non essential items/services. That would have hit the poor really hard/fast. There must be many poor among those who had land, but at least they had rice for themselves.
 
Bro, I am not economist. I am just assuming that the price of rice went up so fast, they could not increase their rates. If it was a situation like normal inflation, then they would have got chance to increase their rates.

People started hoarding rice, cutting on expenditure on non essential items/services. That would have hit the poor really hard/fast. There must be many poor among those who had land, but at least they had rice for themselves.

It's okay, Desi. By the way, your avatar really makes me laugh. Thanks.
 
Its true that there was no shortage of food in Bengal,but wages is only part of the story. Bengal was a hub of nationalist movement and Winston Churchill who was an ardent Colonialist and treated Indian nationlists with contempt could'nt care less. The food was used to support the war effort and shipped to as far away as African and Pacific ocean islands.

HEre is an article which is basically a book review on this. Churchill's abetment to this forgotten holocaust is appalling.
www.outlookindia.com | Churchill’s Famine?
 
Its true that there was no shortage of food in Bengal,but wages is only part of the story. Bengal was a hub of nationalist movement and Winston Churchill who was an ardent Colonialist and treated Indian nationlists with contempt could'nt care less. The food was used to support the war effort and shipped to as far away as African and Pacific ocean islands.

HEre is an article which is basically a book review on this. Churchill's abetment to this forgotten holocaust is appalling.
www.outlookindia.com | Churchill’s Famine?

There was enough food grain, it was mostly an administrative issue. They should have flooded the market with rice and taken decisive action against hoarders.
Wish they had FCI then.
 
Its true that there was no shortage of food in Bengal,but wages is only part of the story. Bengal was a hub of nationalist movement and Winston Churchill who was an ardent Colonialist and treated Indian nationlists with contempt could'nt care less. The food was used to support the war effort and shipped to as far away as African and Pacific ocean islands.

HEre is an article which is basically a book review on this. Churchill's abetment to this forgotten holocaust is appalling.
www.outlookindia.com | Churchill’s Famine?

Thanks a lot, Ejaz. That article is very good.

So, what do we learn? That Churchill was worse than Hitler. Was Indians' lives and blood so cheap that this mass massacre isn't talked about every time they mention something about that Churchill?! I've read a lot of quotations by that mad bull dog! They do mention the holocaust every time Hitler's name pops up. Please correct me if you think I've said something wrong or in a wrong way, except that bull dog part!

Best regards
Haroon
 
Well its unfortunate if people from the sub-continent don't know their own history and what Churchill did. The deaths of these millions of Bengalis is a dark chapter in Indian history were probably never before such a large number had died out of hunger. Churchill who was the PM at that time was hostile to the Indian people and their aspirations for democracy.

But Churchill won the war for Britain and is probably for this reason remembered as a war PM/hero in the west. Both Hitler and Churchill were megalomaniacs probably but Hitler was running a German dictatorship and systematically killed Jews and others. While Churchill at least had to answer to the British parliament if not the Indian public which probably kept him in check and hence could not continue his acts with impunity. He was careless about Indian life but did not go about killing Indians/Bengalis systematically like Hitler did.
 
I think you guys will find it interesting.

25zzquibbbig.jpg


The Telegraph - Calcutta (Kolkata) | Frontpage | A typo resurrects a lost art What happens when an author questions Amartya’s analysis? A glorious tradition springs back to life
 
The quote is applied on the masses ,not on who does the lying.Of course he would accuse the jews of doing that in his own autobiography..u expect him to say i'll lie in his own book?
Goebbels accused churchill of lying by the above method in magazine
-Die Zeit ohne Beispiel.

Don't try to play smart now. You were the one who posted a fake quote in the OP without even doing proper research.

That's not what you were trying to convey earlier through this fake quote, perhaps you should have clarified yourself before propagating this historical fallacy:


Make-the-lie-big.jpg


And neither did you provide a source for that (fake) Goebbels quote.





Germany was one of biggest industrialized nations so yes obviously there would be lot of workers and communism would be popular there.Also Marx and Engles were germans.Communism originated as an idea in germany.

This has nothing to do with what we're discussing.

All communist rebellions happened after end of WW1 when germany already defeated,how did they sabotage german effort after war was already over?

Coming to the issue about Communist strikes and sabotage, are you suggesting that the Communists were sitting idle during the war??

"Strikes erupted in Vienna and Budapest, set off not only by hunger but by Germany's failure to make peace with the new Bolshevik government in Russia. They spread to Germany itself, which had been under virtual military dictatorship for several months, and on Monday, January 28, 1918, workers throughout Germany went out on strike. Peace was their main demand but they also insisted on workers' representation in negotiations with the Allies, increased food rations, the abolition of martial law, and a democratic government throughout Germany. In Munich, another insurrection broke out. It was led by Kurt Eisner, a small elderly Jew wearing a black floppy hat which, large as it was, couldn't contain a shock of wild hair. Epically untidy, he was a living cartoon of the bomb-throwing Red. He had already spent almost nine months in prison for his wartime strike activities. In Friedrichshafen workers at the Zeppelin plant formed a council. The factory workers in the Stuttgart area, including the vast Daimler motor works, struck and, led by socialists with views similar to Eisner's, made similar demands. Government after government throughout Germany collapsed as workers' and soldiers' councils took control" - Adolf Hitler: The Definitive Biography

As for many communist leaders being jews,a communist doesn't believe in god in the first place.
Can you prove that the Leaders of the Communist Revolts in Germany disowned their own Jewish faith?? Please provide valid sources (Links) and not drivel. Thanks.

Give proof of jewish sabotage of german war effort to help britain for homeland in palestine during ww1....

Funny, someone's who posting fabricated quotes is asking for proof. Could you prove your falsified Hitler & Goebbels quotes with actual sources (Links) and not drivel?? That would be appreciated.

Nonetheless, powerful Jewish financiers using their influence to assist Britain in her war against Germany in exchange for Palestine:

"Malcolm's belief in the Balfour Declaration as a means of bringing the United States into the war was confirmed by Samuel Landman, secretary to the Zionist leaders Weizmann and Sokolow, and later secretary of the World Zionist Organization. As

" the only way (which proved so to be) to induce the American President to come into the war was to secure the cooperation of Zionist Jews by promising them Palestine, and thus enlist and mobilize the hitherto unsuspectedly powerful forces of Zionist Jews in America and elsewhere in favour of the Allies on a quid pro quo contract basis. Thus, as will be seen, the Zionists having carried out their part, and greatly helped to bring America in, the Balfour Declaration of 1917 was but the public confirmation of the necessarily secret "gentlemens' " agreement of 1916, made with the previous knowledge, acquiescence, and or approval of the Arabs, and of the British, and of the French and other Allied governments, and not merely a voluntary, altruistic and romantic gesture on the part of Great Britain as certain people either through pardonable ignorance assume or unpardonable ill-will would represent or rather misrepresent ...[188] "- Great Britain, the Jews and Palestine (London, 1936), pp. 4-5, New Zionist Press.

Behind the Balfour Declaration



Communist rebellions were crushed by german govt in 1919 itself.
So Communist revolutions were crushed within Germany in 1919, did that prevent the Soviet Union from invading Poland in 1920 in a Westward drive towards a disarmed Germany?? Of course not.

Soviet Invasion of Poland,1920-Wikipedia



Did hitler rearm to defend germany?What did he with his army once he had re-armed?History is testament.Was Poland,czechoslovakia,denmark,norway,balkans,netherlands,belgium all planning to destroy germany?Don't be a blind apologist just because u like how badass the waffen-ss and their black uniforms were.

Nothing to do with my personal interest in the National Socialist era. If i were blind like you i too would be posting falsified quotes without any proper research on my part.

Regarding Hitler's invasions of the countries you mentioned, i could easily tear apart your argument, though my post would become too long to read.

As for aggressions,ur perfectly right both parties here were imperialists -anglo-french colonial imperialists.Churchill was an arch-imperialist.But despite the oppression,they didn't systematically single out whole peoples like this methodically exterminating them in concentration camps and slave labour.Anglo-french-soviets weren't saints ,but hitler was certainly not a good guy,he was much worse than the rest.
If you believe that the British never employed slave labor and deliberate mass extermination then you really have no clue of history. And don't get me started on the Soviets.

“Indians are the beastliest people in the world next to the Germans"- Winston Churchill

The Greatest Briton: Essays on Winston Churchill's Life and Political Philosophy - Jeremy Havardi - Google Books

How Churchill Starved To Death 4 Million Indians and Got Away With It

India's Partition: The Story of Imperialism in Retreat - Devendra Panigrahi - Google Books

The Bengal Famine of 1943, how 4 million Indians perished





Can one also label early America's "Manifest Destiny" as a quest for Lebensraum and imperialism?? Without achieving this goal America would not have become the power that it is today.



Now this topic is not for discussing ideologies,just the campaign..so plz if u answer start a new topic.

I wasn't discussing ideologies. I noticed that fake quote you posted and decided to point that out lest people buy into that lie since more than half of the so called "Think Tanks" on this forum don't do their own research.
 
Hi

I'm not really sure where this thread should be placed. So, if you think this doesn't belong here, move it where it should be. Thanks.

I couldn't understand the bold part. Could you please help me with it? And I think Bengal was also devastated by famine during the administration of Clive of India.

From Wikipedia article on the famine:




Wikipedia: Bengal famine of 1943 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


What did Gandhi do when gazillions of fellow Indians were dying of hunger?

What did Nehru do when gazillions of fellow Indians were dying of hunger?

Where was Neta Ji's army when gazillions of fellow Indians were dying of hunger?


Where were the filthy rich Tatas birlas and texttile / jute tycoons of Calcutta (Kolkutta now) when gazillions of fellow Indians were dying of hunger?



Blaming everything on others and finding escape goats is easy

Finding local solutions, is hard for little minded people.
 

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom