how many meals could've hundreds of thousands of livestock animals provided? or those crops whose harvest was prevented to the Soviet people?

```the Kulaks played a major part in this. Sure, the Soviet collectivisation set them in motion, yes, but the Soviets are not responsible to the frankly psychopathic actions of the kulaks in the era```


completely irrelevant, we're talking about the cause of the Famine

Which was indeed Soviet Policy.

Soviet Policy was ***not*** the sabotage of crops and killing of hundreds of thousands of livestock. That was ***Kulak Policy***

@Xinyue it would have all ended up in the cities anyway 😩

because you need grain for development right?

there's no escape from the fact that Kulaks were killing whatever could've been spent to alleviate any famine. They single-handedly are the amoral faction #1 in the birth of this famine

the ones whose intent was absolutely solid

@Xinyue Soviet Policy however was far worse, killing all the productive Farmers, replacing them with worse labor and transporting the produce to the cities..


```Soviet Policy was not the sabotage of crops and killing of hundreds of thousands of livestock. That was Kulak Policy```

@Xinyue all you're trying to do is muddly the waters

I've said time and time again that the Soviets killed 600K-700K people who *cannot be justified as kills*

irrelevant

and that this was the great moral failure of the Soviet Union

however,

the killing of the Kulaks came *after* their obstructionism

not before

Soviet Created Famines were also an Atrocity

to which you admit so called Kulaks played a minor role

Kulaks played the major moral role, considering their sabotage was intentional

and can be confirmed to be such

```the killing of the Kulaks came after their obstructionism```


yes, there are always reasons as i said with Nazi and Poland comparison, Soviets made things worse by going ahead with the thing they were protesting

and further, Soviet administration was the one that *ended* the chronic famines in the regions controlled by Soviets that had been a **feature** not a **flaw** in the previous system

```Kulaks played the major moral role, considering their sabotage was intentional```

make up your mind mate @Xinyue

I have said that the kulaks played the major moral role in the famine from the beginning

never once did I flinch in this

@Stern No no no... not so easy. Lets start first with which countries participated in the golden blocade. A link to the source plox... sencond we will go to why it had to paid in grain. (Just as a side not "Without industrialized transportation and production systems, famine is more likely to occur" this "is more likely to occur is already moving the goalpost)

Soviet Policy began it, yes, because it set the Kulak Reaction in motion, however this was not moral matter because it was not intentional on the part of the Soviets

first of all, it wasn't sabotage by "Kulaks", for someone so intent on defending the pure intentions of the Soviet State, u sure don't care about the intentions of people you Dehumanize @Xinyue

They were protesting after making petitions after petitions

No Farmer ever Burns their own produce for no reason, and i know you think Soviet Policy was for greater good, but the results after the slaughter of "Kulaks" describe a different story @Xinyue

kulaks are basically white farmers in SA

yeah, they called small time farmers Bourgeoisie and these people still do as though they were owners of some multi million dollar concentrated Monopoly

I don't think that the farmers in africa did anything

these were multiple small time Farmers these people killed and then wondered why there's a fall in produce, pretty much the story in Zimbabwe

and it's the same dehumanization

@AdorableStormtrooper I do get that they were making petitions, but this is immaterial because in the end they decided to fuck over everybody in their country rather than hand over the farms to collective ownership and then share in the benefits. I never said they did it for no reason, its very clear they did it out of spite.

that's basically u suciding ur economy if u want collective ownership

just share the benefits mayyyn

look at the people that actually want communism in SA

>when you have a famine but continue exporting grain

It was the Soviets who decided to fuck everyone over with their economic policy mate, not little maa and paw farms on the country side 😂 @Xinyue

collective ownership worked just fine during the USSR post Stalin, absolutely no famines of any kind

it's the same thuggish mentality that stalin had, just take it by force

@Stern Then you would have to prove that industralization couldn't wait for a year or two.

ussr collapsed post stalin

Sovkhoz and Kolkhoz did provide foodstuffs just fine

@Xinyue absolutely no food shortages amiright?

zero famines, yes

@Aki ?

Well will you adress it or not?

no food shortages, ever after the holodomor? right? @Xinyue

no murders post murder

I don't know of any major food shortages in 1960s, 1970s for example. I do know that foodstamps are common in US though @AdorableStormtrooper

what does that mean?

@Aki do you deny that agrarian economies can't transport and produce food as well as industrial nations (along with not being able to produce military goods necessary to defend a country in time of war)

Foodstamps are free food

That is not what I asked you for mate.

food stamps shouldn't be common

@Aki ok

but do you deny it

What do food stamps have to do with food shortage

Its the ability to provide people

With food

Even when they can't pay for it

That is the opposite

No?

No I don't but it is in a way outside of the point.

It's leading to the point

ok give me the point then

@Xinyue does everyone deserve food? why?

US economic system is inadequate at delivering food to everyone; hence why they have to create a system outside the economic system to make sure food finds it way to the people the economic system can't reach. Food rationing in general is like this, you work outside the basic economic system to make sure that people get fed. Point is, people *were* fed, clothed and housed and the public sector determined the utilisation of the productive forces. The system did reach the goals that it set out to attain.

That's the Wrong Goals

"do you deny that agrarian economies can't transport and produce food as well as industrial nations (along with not being able to produce military goods necessary to defend a country in time of war)"
since you agree with this point, it's common sense to put industrialization as an emphasis

Subjective opinion on your part @AdorableStormtrooper

But it is adequate at delivering food to everyone

They can still eat

Thats what foodstamps are for

because unindustrialized economies can't produce or transport anything as efficiently as industrial ones

Am I not understanding something

i reserve my right

@Xinyue Your entire ideology depends on this, and i don't believe in a subjective morality, so no.
That is seriously a wrong goal.

Such an abundance of food literally giving it to the homeless and poor

so was Soviet economy after Stalin @Huff everyone did get fed, there was no famine

to challenge the us president to a battle to the death

for

over the control of the us government

free

@Stern Wow and ?

@Huff he's trying to say food stamps are a way of supplying people through government systems when the market system is inadequate (i'm pretty sure, maybe I'm misunderstanding too)

HOLMGANG HOLMGANG HOLMGANG @Ventruvi

@Stern are you going to make an argument?

@Aki alright never mind then

@AdorableStormtrooper

So you won't adress my questions?

@Aki wow and?

```@Huff he's trying to say food stamps are a way of supplying people through government systems when the market system is inadequate (i'm pretty sure, maybe I'm misunderstanding too)```

inadequate in doing what?

@Stern yeah that's what I meant, and food rationing is an analogue in socialist system to fix similar failing of economic system

@Stern I see, I don't think the market system is supposed to feed people tho

@AdorableStormtrooper idk, it's his point, I was trying to explain it to huff

Failing? that's subjective according to you @Xinyue