they make money off of selling them

which is an important difference

they owned the wheat so they controlled hte supply

if nothing was done they'd just sit on it until people began starviving and would pay a lot

The famine didn't happen because they hogged the wheat did it

partly I believe

So why didn't they barge their farms and take it?

but I'm no expert here

well that's what the revolution is about

but kulaks can hire weapons

It was already communist by the first big ukranian famine

and suddenly you have class warfare

>People who use the famine as a reason to call Communism obsolete

Hey remember the Irish Potato Famine?

I could use many reasons fam

famine is luckily a pretty unlikely thing to happen today

at least in the industrialized world which includes russia today

dunno about china tbh

and india

It's retarded that just because there was a famine people think it MUST have been Communism's fault.

It stands out because capitalistic societies don't get that at all

Unless a war is happening

Irish Potato Famine

That was the government making the Irish starve

Thus it was Capitalism's fault.

not capitalism, which would make it possible to sell the irish their food

government stands in the way of capitalism often

So when there's famine in a Communist country it's Communism's fault but when it's in a Capitalist country it's not Capitalism's fault.

Amazing logic

That's not what I said

Yes you did

State overlooked farming was a disaster because the state isn't the expert in that field, the farmers are

What happened in the UK was not a failure of farming but the government cracking down on the Irish

I can't handle the cringe

You're unable to argue, the other guy was sane

No you're just being ignorant.

state overlooked farming wasn't a disaster. what's the argument for that? that a single incident happened

?

The famine in the Soviet Union was going on even in Tsarist Russia.

also only ML actually want that I think

Right, because Tsardom wasn't a good system either