Socialism & Starvation


It is often held as common knowledge that
people in socialist countries suffered from shortages of food and a lack of nutrition;
but, is this actually the case? Looking at statistical data regarding food
intake in Russia before, during and after socialism suggests a different story entirely.
Before socialism, Russian people were taking in on average 2,109 calories per day. Once
socialism had been established, this number began to increase and by the 1970s people
were taking in over 3,000 calories per day. Another thing to consider is that before socialism,
bread accounted for 58% of an average Russian’s diet, and only 7% was meat. Once socialism
had been established people’s diets improved, and by 1980 bread only accounted for 25% and
meat accounted for 11%. People also started to consume more higher-quality food such as
vegetables, milk, eggs, fish and sugar. In fact, up until the mid 80s people in the
Soviet Union were actually eating more food than people in the United States and United
Kindgom But what about the pictures we’re always shown
of long waiting lines and empty shelves, surely we have to take them into account. Well, the
best place to look to would be someone who lived in the Soviet Union and can speak from
personal experience. One such person, Julia Hawkins, admits that there were often long
lines and empty shelves, however she points out that people’s fridges were always full.
This says a lot about the differing ways a socialist system and a capitalist system distribute
food. In a capitalist system, you can buy all the food you want, if you have the money,
that is. If you’re poor, you’re simply left to starve. A socialist system, on the other
hand, tries to provide for everyone, even if it means having to wait. Isn’t it better
to wait for your food than to see people starve on the streets or resort to theft? When the Soviet Union dissolved and capitalism
was established, people’s caloric intake fell drastically; they started eating more bread
and potatoes and less of the higher-quality foods mentioned before, that is: meat, vegetables,
milk, eggs, fish and sugar. It’s no surpise, then, that the death rate skyrocketed. In China, programs of land reform, collectivisation
and industrialisation – contrary to popular belief – significantly improved the food situation.
In 1965, only 17% of countryside in the Shanghai area was machine-tilled. By 1972, this number
had increased to 76%. This lead to a rise in agricultural output. Dongping Han, a man
who lived in Jimo county at the time stated that: “Agricultural output, in my village
at least, doubled” His account is also backed up by statistical
evidence. In Kwantung province, for instance, grain production doubled from 16 billion catties
in 1949 to 32 billion in 1958. Before the Cuban revolution:
– Only 4% of Cuban peasants ate meat regularly – Only 1% ate fish
– less than 2% ate eggs – 3% ate bread
– 11% drank milk – none ate green vegetables Looking at Cuba’s past and, importantly, the
economic hardship Cuba has faced, you’d be surprised to learn that the United Nations
Food and Agriculture Organization reports that Cuba, today, is completely free of child
malnutrition. Not only this, it is the only country in Latin America to have completely
eliminated severe malnutrition, specifically through the government’s efforts. Add on to
that the fact that Cuba is making innovations into urban farming, with organic urban farms
in Havana supplying 100% of the city’s consumption needs in fruit and vegetables. When you compare Cuba before the revolution
to Cuba today, you can see that the role socialism has played in eliminating starvation is undeniable.
At this point, you can’t help but quesiton the established narrative of socialism leading
to starvation. There are other examples we can look to as
well. In Burkina Faso, the socialist government
of Thomas Sankara carried out redistribution of land and irrigation and fertilisation programs,
which drastically improved agricultural productivity. In 1986, the average wheat production for
the Sahel region was 1,700 kilograms per hectare. In that same year, Burkina Faso was producing
3,900 kilograms per hectare. In just 4 years, Burkina Faso was made agriculturally self-sufficient,
and keep in mind that this was all accomplished without any foreign aid. In Chile, government programs like the National
Milk Plan and grassroots socialist organisations like the People’s Supply Committees ensured
people were adequately fed. During Salvador Allende’s presidency child malnutrition fell
by 17%. Before Allende’s election, meat was considered a luxury; afterwards, the socialist
system ensured people were adequately provided for. After Allende was overthrown, the new
government implemented a polciy of strict neo-liberalism. Food consumption under the
new government dropped significantly. Compare that to the neighboring capitalist
country of Argentina, where today 20% of children suffer from malnutrition, despite the fact
that Argentina is the fourth largest exporter of food in the world, and has more cattle
than people. This isn’t just a problem in Argentina. Across
the world, there is a surplus of food, by some estimates we have enough food to feed
twice the global population, and yet people starve. Even in the richest nations in the
world, people still struggle to afford food while wealth is concentrated into fewer and
fewer hands. So you have to ask, why? We have the capacity
to completely eradicate hunger, as proven by these examples. So why does it still exist? When you begin to criticise capitalism by
asking questions like this, and when you look at socialist countries and their history of
eliminating starvation, you have to ask, which system is preferable?




Comments
  1. Just found your channel to use to debunk capitalists.
    Keep up the work. Your doing a service Comrade.

  2. PSA: recently, it has been discovered that FinnishBolshevik has been doing, well, this:
    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DaO3raZW0AA9PPj.jpg

    Note that "Kennedy" is a girl he was close with around the age of 16. According to his defense/apology, they identified with similar mental conditions after meeting online. I unsubscribed, and if you find this behavior disgusting, you should too.

  3. And to think they accomplished all this while under extreme economic attack by capitalist superpowers.Just think what could be accomplished in a world of peace and freedom!

  4. Funny how over 36 million people died in the GLF and the CR but of course I'm sure it was all down to the drought and cold winters. What a load of fucking bunk.

  5. We learned. Modern capitalist technology increased production of food. Socialism ultimately crashed each time tried. Socialism requires a free market to begin and will flourish for a short period before ultimate collapse and starvation.

  6. What about the great leap forward? The holodomor? The starvation and corruption in North Korea? Venezuela, though I do admit that case is not particularly the cause of die-hard socialism, but it was the cause of the central bank printing huge amounts of money.

    Nearly all European countries became rich only after the classical liberal free marekts dominated in the 1800's. Before this, the state's influence on society was immense, and people suffered.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *