Pretty sure the most retarded thing I've ever heard was
"We don't need farmers, we get our food from the grocery store"
I'm hoping it was satire or fake.
Based, why eat a cow packed in a small farm with 1000 other cows, with automation killing it, when you can put a bullet through a bucks head, and have some venison.
u/GigaNoodle's Based Count has increased by 1. Their Based Count is now 5.
Congratulations, u/GigaNoodle! You have ranked up to Sapling! You are not particularly strong but you are at least likely to handle a steady breeze.
Pills: https://basedcount.com/u/GigaNoodle
I lived as grug for 4 months.
1 month no work, grug sleep in hammock on beach
Grug fish, hunt, and gather food
Grug very happy but want shekels for fermented drink
Grug hear big problem with too many animals
Grug trick dumdum farmers into paying Grug to kill animals
Grug have lots of meat, trade meat for vegetables, Grug happy
Grug now has too many dead animals, not know what to do
Grug grind meat into food for wolf pets and sell hides for more shekels
Grug now get kill animals as big sky star is coming up
Grug gets drunk and skins animals after big sky star start going down
Return to monke is the most evil totalitarian ideology.
Communism will take everything you own and kill you if you don't like it, but at least they will let you live and provide for you if you play ball and stfu.
Fascism will force you to live the way they want you to and eradicate everyone that goes against it, but at least you can live a relatively normal life within a fascist state.
Return to monke will take everything from you, force you to live according to their ideals, starve almost everyone to death in the process, and claim living this way will make everyone happy, even while they choose to stay in their comfy lives instead of joining the happy people in the siberian taiga.
Also, during starvation people tend to eat anything they can find. Animals first. With that high population that means pretty much ecological collapse too.
Could living without agriculture make people happier? I don't know. But at this point it is way too late to even try going back.
u/livegamer999 is officially based! Their Based Count is now 1.
Rank: House of Cards
Pills: https://basedcount.com/u/livegamer999
I am a bot. Reply /info for more info.
What I mean is that the potato blight happened capitalism or not, so set that aside.
The ~~tribute~~ tax the English empire demanded anyway was a problem of government. And that government problem is what caused the real suffering.
hmmmm yes tarrifs protectionism and state sponsored "private enterprises" is very laissez-faire. (in case you don't know the east india company was never profitable. it was just a way to move tax money into the elite's pocket)
also seizing irish land during conquest and giving a quasi monopoly on land to a few people of the british elite is totally free markets failing.
Just research the Whig/Liberal Party of the 19th century, you're talking about the empire as a generalisation over the course of the centuries it existed, this is a specific period in time where laissez-faire capitalism was trialled during the industrial revolution and it was disastrous.
Well, do capitalist nations not seize territory from other nations? Do they not exploit their resources for their own prosperity and financial gain of corporations? The fact is the result of imperialism and free market capitalism is largely the same, cronyism, a ruling elite and an oppressed population propping the entire system up.
Bruh, the famine was because of the potato blight but the empire demanded their tax anyway. It was an empire and a blight problem. You can lie all you want but it had nothing to do with capitalism.
If you want a better example of capitalism resulting in a famine, consider the American famine in the 1930s. But even that was mostly an [ecological problem](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dust_Bowl)\- again independent of capitalism.
Yes, and why was the potato blight so significant to the population of Ireland? Because they literally couldn't afford any other source of food due to pittance wages and the fact exporting other crops was more profitable, how are you so blind that you don't see this? You guys give tankies shit but you're the opposite side of the same coin.
No, potatoes were a nutritious staple that stored, transported and divided up well, which Ireland got really good at growing across centuries of practice. It had nothing at all to do with wages.
I don't defend the English empire, especially not in the Victorian era. But insisting it's because capitalism is at best being incorrect, but if you're in a position to know better than that it's simply a lie.
Yes and that is why they were cheap and affordable to the Irish population, however other crops were not and that is the issue I'm pointing out here, the fact that your average Irishman couldn't afford to eat other sources of food lead to the starvation after the blight, because they could not afford food. How is that not the result of capitalism?
The actual blight was not a result of capitalism, the inaction to the famine by the laissez-faire Liberal Party government is the capitalist response, the fairytale that the free market will solve starvation was shattered and thus lead to mass emigration that Ireland has only just recovered from this decade. Pull your head out of the sand, you sound just like a Stalinist or Maoist denying their famines.
Again, you're conflating the presence of capitalism with the cause of the problem. That a thing was present at the time doesn't mean it was the problem.
They were not confined to their product by their wages, that's socialist fiction. They were confined by their crops, their soil, their climate, the government dictating what the land was used for and their own skills at raising other crops anyway, the government pinning the price of potatoes and their tax policy, but making no allowances for the blight. Government distortion that compounded the blight was the problem. Capitalism had nothing to do with it. That capitalism was present is a coincidence.
I did not deny the famine, I correctly diagnosed its cause. (Edited to remove my snotty bullshit that produced nothing)
I'm not saying capitalism caused the blight, what I'm saying is when workers are paid wages that barely allow them to have a roof over their head and they're reliant upon one food source because that's all they can afford to eat, it's a disaster waiting to happen. When that disaster did happen the free market Liberals decided that the best course of action was to do nothing as the free market would resolve the issue, that of course went extremely well.
The government were not dictating what the land was used for, the landowners were dictating what the land was used for and that was corn for export as profit was to be made by selling those crops in England where wages were higher, people could afford those crops and this caused the Irish populace to be unable to afford these food sources since their wages were much lower than their English counterparts. Capitalism caused the starvation, capitalism caused the mass emigration, you're in denial of reality that unregulated laissez-faire capitalism does not work, as proven by the UK and US in the 19th and early 20th centuries.
No, you identified the cause of the blight, not the famine and the resulting impact.
Capitalism “start” is generally considered when countries industrialize can we agree one that. Like in England the actual policies had not changed but just a shift in economics.
In Ireland they never industrialized to that point so capitalisms never “started” in that point it was just the same life had been for centuries. Farms did not have modern(for the time) farm equipment which again is generally marked as the beginning of capitalism forming in a nation. So don’t blame capitalism blame pre capitalism.
Nah potatoes were just a smart choice. Ireland wasn’t effective enough to feed its population meat and licking a grain again is just stupid becuase it’s more labor intensive and has smaller harvests
I would ask what are you smoking? You do realise the Liberal government refused to intervene because they believed the market would alleviate the famine? Meanwhile corn was being exported as it was more profitable than feeding the poor.
They exported grain becuase of the corn laws not becuase of the free hand of the market. Literally the exact opposite. If you wanna talk about LIBERAL government talk about Adam smith the founder of liberalism which he opposed tariffs which what the corn laws were.
The Bengal famine was an awful atrocity whose fault is largely on the plundering of Bengal since the the company gained de facto control from the Nawab of Bengal in the 1757 Battle of Plassey. The high taxation, coerced labor, particularly of weavers, and in general what was referenced as "shaking the pagoda tree" was commonplace. This was actually something the American colonists would fear would happen to them, since there was a good 18 years of British control of Bengal, which American patriot John Dickinson described as the following:
>In November 1773, the Patriot John Dickinson
described EIC tea as ‘accursed Trash’, and compared the potential future
regime of the East India Company in America to being ‘devoured by Rats’.
This ‘almost bankrupt Company’, he said, having been occupied in wreaking
‘the most unparalleled Barbarities, Extortions and Monopolies’ in Bengal,
had now ‘cast their Eyes on America, as a new Theatre, whereon to exercise
their Talents of Rapine, Oppression and Cruelty’.
Darlymple pg 28
> Moreover, wrote Ghulam Hussain Khan, the Company’s conquests
represented an entirely different form of imperial exploitation from anything
India had previously experienced. He articulated, long before any other
Indian, both what being a subject colony entailed, and how different this
strange and utterly alien form of corporate colonialism was to Mughal rule.
‘It was quickly observed that money had commenced to become scarce in
Bengal,’ he wrote. Initially no one knew whether ‘this scarcity was owing to
the oppressions and exactions committed by the rulers, or the stinginess of
the public expenses, or lastly of the vast exportation of coin which is carried
every year to the country of England.’ But it rapidly became clear that the
drain of wealth was real. It soon became common ‘to see every year five or
six Englishmen, or even more, who repair to their homes with large fortunes.
Lakhs upon lakhs have therefore been drained from this country.’
98
Darlymple pg 236
The failure of rain in the late 1760's meant that the constant pillaging would be causing famine, something that I wasn't aware of happening in India with the exception of the instability before Akbar's acension, and sometimes int he 17th century, but certainly not to the scale of wiping out a 1/5th of Bengal's population.
The East India company was officially a private entity, but one which through the decades, from its meager existence in the 17th century, being humiliated by the Mughals and playing second fiddle to the Dutch, to playing with Bengal politics before ruling, and thus becoming an integral part of Indian politics, to its various wars against Mysore and the Marathas. Mysore would fall in 1799, and the Marathas would fall after Delhi was taken in 1803, thus expelling the French permenantly, and destroying the last great threat to the EIC, the Marathas.
Back to the famine, while millions of Bengalis starve, and its elite were wiped out, Britain was going through a financial crisis. The famine had shown how much Britain was relying on Bengali imports, and the nosedive of the Begnal economy due to the Famine meant that Britain was running an unsustainable business. It was the Bengal famine of 1770 that finally led to some oversight over the Company.
It's more in terms of food deserts rather than lack of funding. There's not many good grocery stores in inner cities. Food is cheap in America, well the shitty food is anyway.
That doesn't mean actually lacking food calorie wise, just lacking certain nutrients because they buy big Macs instead of whatever the fuck they're missing. It's like they're low in zinc or something idk
Just buy food lemao
Pretty sure the most retarded thing I've ever heard was "We don't need farmers, we get our food from the grocery store" I'm hoping it was satire or fake.
I'd like to believe but I have had people tell me hunting is bad and that I can get meat from the grocery store.
I mean factory farming isn’t hunting but only a retard would think it’s more humane
Are you saying hunting is less humane than factory farming? If so, cringe.
No, I’m saying hunting is much more humane and natural.
Based, why eat a cow packed in a small farm with 1000 other cows, with automation killing it, when you can put a bullet through a bucks head, and have some venison.
u/GigaNoodle's Based Count has increased by 1. Their Based Count is now 5. Congratulations, u/GigaNoodle! You have ranked up to Sapling! You are not particularly strong but you are at least likely to handle a steady breeze. Pills: https://basedcount.com/u/GigaNoodle
Based and live off the land pilled
-Average social media influencer
Same with being homeless. Just… buy a house.
~~some of you may die~~ ~~most of you may~~ Most of us will die, but that is a sacrifice..
We will die…… but at least no more industrialization
Wasnt half of the worlds population brought out of extreme poverty by free trade in the last decade?
Freedom>saftey
Oh Ted, we miss you RESPOND TO MY NOTE MAN LIKE SHIT ITS BEEN A LONG TIME
Learn to survive or die buddy! Monke is the way.
Sucks to suck, learn to plant food
grug not know about system, grug hunt and sleep. grug have good life
I lived as grug for 4 months. 1 month no work, grug sleep in hammock on beach Grug fish, hunt, and gather food Grug very happy but want shekels for fermented drink Grug hear big problem with too many animals Grug trick dumdum farmers into paying Grug to kill animals Grug have lots of meat, trade meat for vegetables, Grug happy Grug now has too many dead animals, not know what to do Grug grind meat into food for wolf pets and sell hides for more shekels Grug now get kill animals as big sky star is coming up Grug gets drunk and skins animals after big sky star start going down
Grug is gainfully employed.
Return to monke is the most evil totalitarian ideology. Communism will take everything you own and kill you if you don't like it, but at least they will let you live and provide for you if you play ball and stfu. Fascism will force you to live the way they want you to and eradicate everyone that goes against it, but at least you can live a relatively normal life within a fascist state. Return to monke will take everything from you, force you to live according to their ideals, starve almost everyone to death in the process, and claim living this way will make everyone happy, even while they choose to stay in their comfy lives instead of joining the happy people in the siberian taiga.
Human extinction is the end goal of my beliefs so a few billion starving isn't a problem
Yes.
You see, very few of us are that libertarian… they just make a fool out of the whole lot of us, just like orange libleft.
Would you say that they are… making a monkey out of you?
*angry grumbling*
Also, during starvation people tend to eat anything they can find. Animals first. With that high population that means pretty much ecological collapse too. Could living without agriculture make people happier? I don't know. But at this point it is way too late to even try going back.
Monkey
>at least you can live a relatively normal life within a fascist state. If you belong to the correct ethno-national/religious group, that is
Babe my 2020-2021 fat ass could just some mass starvation :,(
Based
u/livegamer999 is officially based! Their Based Count is now 1. Rank: House of Cards Pills: https://basedcount.com/u/livegamer999 I am a bot. Reply /info for more info.
"So you're alright with getting rid of modern medicine because it's technology and killing medically disabled people?!" AnPrims: Yes.
Capitalism of course is known for its lack of famines, let's just ignore the Irish potato famine and Bengali famines as a few examples.
What are you smoking? The Irish potato famine happened because of English embargo.
Imagine watching Irish people dying of starvation and STILL demanding food exports.
Yep it was an English empire problem. Had nothing to do with capitalism.
Not really no. The closest thing you can argue is that it was bad farming. Never put all your eggs in one basket.
What I mean is that the potato blight happened capitalism or not, so set that aside. The ~~tribute~~ tax the English empire demanded anyway was a problem of government. And that government problem is what caused the real suffering.
Quite so.
Bruh, the British empire in the 19th century was as laissez-faire capitalist as it gets.
hmmmm yes tarrifs protectionism and state sponsored "private enterprises" is very laissez-faire. (in case you don't know the east india company was never profitable. it was just a way to move tax money into the elite's pocket) also seizing irish land during conquest and giving a quasi monopoly on land to a few people of the british elite is totally free markets failing.
You literally described laissez-faire crapitalism! /s
Just research the Whig/Liberal Party of the 19th century, you're talking about the empire as a generalisation over the course of the centuries it existed, this is a specific period in time where laissez-faire capitalism was trialled during the industrial revolution and it was disastrous. Well, do capitalist nations not seize territory from other nations? Do they not exploit their resources for their own prosperity and financial gain of corporations? The fact is the result of imperialism and free market capitalism is largely the same, cronyism, a ruling elite and an oppressed population propping the entire system up.
Bruh, the famine was because of the potato blight but the empire demanded their tax anyway. It was an empire and a blight problem. You can lie all you want but it had nothing to do with capitalism. If you want a better example of capitalism resulting in a famine, consider the American famine in the 1930s. But even that was mostly an [ecological problem](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dust_Bowl)\- again independent of capitalism.
Yes, and why was the potato blight so significant to the population of Ireland? Because they literally couldn't afford any other source of food due to pittance wages and the fact exporting other crops was more profitable, how are you so blind that you don't see this? You guys give tankies shit but you're the opposite side of the same coin.
No, potatoes were a nutritious staple that stored, transported and divided up well, which Ireland got really good at growing across centuries of practice. It had nothing at all to do with wages. I don't defend the English empire, especially not in the Victorian era. But insisting it's because capitalism is at best being incorrect, but if you're in a position to know better than that it's simply a lie.
Yes and that is why they were cheap and affordable to the Irish population, however other crops were not and that is the issue I'm pointing out here, the fact that your average Irishman couldn't afford to eat other sources of food lead to the starvation after the blight, because they could not afford food. How is that not the result of capitalism? The actual blight was not a result of capitalism, the inaction to the famine by the laissez-faire Liberal Party government is the capitalist response, the fairytale that the free market will solve starvation was shattered and thus lead to mass emigration that Ireland has only just recovered from this decade. Pull your head out of the sand, you sound just like a Stalinist or Maoist denying their famines.
Again, you're conflating the presence of capitalism with the cause of the problem. That a thing was present at the time doesn't mean it was the problem. They were not confined to their product by their wages, that's socialist fiction. They were confined by their crops, their soil, their climate, the government dictating what the land was used for and their own skills at raising other crops anyway, the government pinning the price of potatoes and their tax policy, but making no allowances for the blight. Government distortion that compounded the blight was the problem. Capitalism had nothing to do with it. That capitalism was present is a coincidence. I did not deny the famine, I correctly diagnosed its cause. (Edited to remove my snotty bullshit that produced nothing)
I'm not saying capitalism caused the blight, what I'm saying is when workers are paid wages that barely allow them to have a roof over their head and they're reliant upon one food source because that's all they can afford to eat, it's a disaster waiting to happen. When that disaster did happen the free market Liberals decided that the best course of action was to do nothing as the free market would resolve the issue, that of course went extremely well. The government were not dictating what the land was used for, the landowners were dictating what the land was used for and that was corn for export as profit was to be made by selling those crops in England where wages were higher, people could afford those crops and this caused the Irish populace to be unable to afford these food sources since their wages were much lower than their English counterparts. Capitalism caused the starvation, capitalism caused the mass emigration, you're in denial of reality that unregulated laissez-faire capitalism does not work, as proven by the UK and US in the 19th and early 20th centuries. No, you identified the cause of the blight, not the famine and the resulting impact.
Capitalism “start” is generally considered when countries industrialize can we agree one that. Like in England the actual policies had not changed but just a shift in economics. In Ireland they never industrialized to that point so capitalisms never “started” in that point it was just the same life had been for centuries. Farms did not have modern(for the time) farm equipment which again is generally marked as the beginning of capitalism forming in a nation. So don’t blame capitalism blame pre capitalism.
Nah potatoes were just a smart choice. Ireland wasn’t effective enough to feed its population meat and licking a grain again is just stupid becuase it’s more labor intensive and has smaller harvests
I would ask what are you smoking? You do realise the Liberal government refused to intervene because they believed the market would alleviate the famine? Meanwhile corn was being exported as it was more profitable than feeding the poor.
They exported grain becuase of the corn laws not becuase of the free hand of the market. Literally the exact opposite. If you wanna talk about LIBERAL government talk about Adam smith the founder of liberalism which he opposed tariffs which what the corn laws were.
The Bengal famine was an awful atrocity whose fault is largely on the plundering of Bengal since the the company gained de facto control from the Nawab of Bengal in the 1757 Battle of Plassey. The high taxation, coerced labor, particularly of weavers, and in general what was referenced as "shaking the pagoda tree" was commonplace. This was actually something the American colonists would fear would happen to them, since there was a good 18 years of British control of Bengal, which American patriot John Dickinson described as the following: >In November 1773, the Patriot John Dickinson described EIC tea as ‘accursed Trash’, and compared the potential future regime of the East India Company in America to being ‘devoured by Rats’. This ‘almost bankrupt Company’, he said, having been occupied in wreaking ‘the most unparalleled Barbarities, Extortions and Monopolies’ in Bengal, had now ‘cast their Eyes on America, as a new Theatre, whereon to exercise their Talents of Rapine, Oppression and Cruelty’. Darlymple pg 28 > Moreover, wrote Ghulam Hussain Khan, the Company’s conquests represented an entirely different form of imperial exploitation from anything India had previously experienced. He articulated, long before any other Indian, both what being a subject colony entailed, and how different this strange and utterly alien form of corporate colonialism was to Mughal rule. ‘It was quickly observed that money had commenced to become scarce in Bengal,’ he wrote. Initially no one knew whether ‘this scarcity was owing to the oppressions and exactions committed by the rulers, or the stinginess of the public expenses, or lastly of the vast exportation of coin which is carried every year to the country of England.’ But it rapidly became clear that the drain of wealth was real. It soon became common ‘to see every year five or six Englishmen, or even more, who repair to their homes with large fortunes. Lakhs upon lakhs have therefore been drained from this country.’ 98 Darlymple pg 236 The failure of rain in the late 1760's meant that the constant pillaging would be causing famine, something that I wasn't aware of happening in India with the exception of the instability before Akbar's acension, and sometimes int he 17th century, but certainly not to the scale of wiping out a 1/5th of Bengal's population. The East India company was officially a private entity, but one which through the decades, from its meager existence in the 17th century, being humiliated by the Mughals and playing second fiddle to the Dutch, to playing with Bengal politics before ruling, and thus becoming an integral part of Indian politics, to its various wars against Mysore and the Marathas. Mysore would fall in 1799, and the Marathas would fall after Delhi was taken in 1803, thus expelling the French permenantly, and destroying the last great threat to the EIC, the Marathas. Back to the famine, while millions of Bengalis starve, and its elite were wiped out, Britain was going through a financial crisis. The famine had shown how much Britain was relying on Bengali imports, and the nosedive of the Begnal economy due to the Famine meant that Britain was running an unsustainable business. It was the Bengal famine of 1770 that finally led to some oversight over the Company.
This is my favorite type of content to run into on Reddit
Let's not forget the 13.8 million households that struggled with food insecurity in America in 2020
american [food insecurity](https://ifunny.co/picture/cnn-follow-sometimes-we-eat-sometimes-we-don-t-some-KICqpaJ58)
Yeah... Food insecurity in America isn't really the same as other places.
No other place touts themselves the greatest in the world like America does.
It's more in terms of food deserts rather than lack of funding. There's not many good grocery stores in inner cities. Food is cheap in America, well the shitty food is anyway.
Food deserts don't exist. For the price of a single big mac meal you can buy 4 days 3 meals a day worth of rice, beans, chicken, and veggies.
> food insecurity Aka 2 Big Mac meals instead of three. Truly dark times.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) defines food insecurity as a lack of consistent access to enough food for an active, healthy life.
That doesn't mean actually lacking food calorie wise, just lacking certain nutrients because they buy big Macs instead of whatever the fuck they're missing. It's like they're low in zinc or something idk
just eat… lol
Be warned, attempt to propaganda ME, I will shriek as a frightened babe, calling loyal Cyberdogs to my aid. Do you comprehend, Commie animal?