tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12471112.post4167467992322888677..comments2023-08-20T11:07:28.396+01:00Comments on Freeborn John: Powell and BosePeter Risdonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17792275403997179926noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12471112.post-56286414850356308862009-09-02T07:30:55.771+01:002009-09-02T07:30:55.771+01:00DM I don't think Sen argues that famine is dis...DM I don't think Sen argues that famine is distributed according to the degree of democratic deficit within a jurisdiction.Peter Risdonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17792275403997179926noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12471112.post-64936473802777449122009-09-01T22:43:00.731+01:002009-09-01T22:43:00.731+01:00If you took Sen seriously, you'd say that the ...If you took Sen seriously, you'd say that the 1840s potato famine would have affected most seriously the part of the UK with the biggest democratic deficit - which was Scotland, not Ireland. But the tattie-dependent parts of Scotland, though hard hit by the blight, didn't suffer to the same extent. That was mainly due, I'd guess, to the blessings of the Clearances. If you move the subsistence-farming peasantry off to the Lowlands, Canada and Australia, they are safe from exposure to that vulnerable monoculture. (It might also have helped that those who stayed were more accessible by sea for relief supplies than were many of the Irish.) Anyway, democracy doesn't have much to do with it - in the UK, that is. Whether it had much to do with the potato famine in Belgium I don't know.deariemenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12471112.post-85443428286617789532009-09-01T07:52:49.837+01:002009-09-01T07:52:49.837+01:00The Bengal Famine was caused by a panic destructio...The Bengal Famine was caused by a panic destruction of crops in order to help stem the Japanese advance. Remember, "An army marches on its stomach".<br /><br />The Japanese had made great use of the food available in areas they had overrun in order to continue their advance. It's easy to say with hindsight that the initial decision was wrong when it could have been entirely correct.<br /><br />A fair and valid criticism would have been that a proper effort was not made to ship food in when the Japanese unexpectedly halted their advance, but that criticism wasn't the one made.<br /><br />As for Bose, perhaps he should have asked the people of China after the Japanese invasion of Manchuria and the "Rape of Nanking" whether they thought the Japanese would have made better colonial governors than the British Empire.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02948105455433369982noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12471112.post-47281428148063723782009-09-01T07:29:39.733+01:002009-09-01T07:29:39.733+01:00Sen does seem to be saying that, so far as I can s...Sen does seem to be saying that, so far as I can see. The people affected most severely by famine need to have the vote for their views to be an effective sanction. Hence the point that India hasn't had a famine since 1947 - but Bangladesh has.Peter Risdonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17792275403997179926noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12471112.post-48547328296501678472009-08-31T22:56:53.815+01:002009-08-31T22:56:53.815+01:00Which bit wasn't true of Ireland (in the 1840s...Which bit wasn't true of Ireland (in the 1840s)? Unless he means "universal franchise democracy" which would make his argument not so much wrong as plain silly. (For instance, it would mean saying that famine wasn't a problem for the USA after the 1960s. Brilliant.)deariemenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12471112.post-66669180660644551412009-08-31T10:17:47.054+01:002009-08-31T10:17:47.054+01:00Ref the quote from Powell supplied by O.Kamm - &qu...Ref the quote from Powell supplied by O.Kamm - "...organise to consolidate their members, to agitate and campaign against their fellow citizens, and to overawe and dominate the rest with the legal weapons..."<br /><br />Sounds about right to me. Isn't that more or less what they've done? Especially the Muslims?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12471112.post-80347985341454106782009-08-30T22:26:22.486+01:002009-08-30T22:26:22.486+01:00Retardo, I apologise: Subhas Chandra Bose.
DM, ye...Retardo, I apologise: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subhas_Chandra_Bose" rel="nofollow">Subhas Chandra Bose</a>.<br /><br />DM, yes, I agree - and that's in accordance with my account, isn't it?<br /><br />The Irish Famine... a democracy with a free press? I'm not a sure that's right about Ireland in the 1860s.Peter Risdonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17792275403997179926noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12471112.post-26251040608185625882009-08-30T22:08:52.897+01:002009-08-30T22:08:52.897+01:00Who's "Bose" and what did he have to...Who's "Bose" and what did he have to do with the Nazis? With Enoch Powell, you at least provide a first name so the reader can go find out what he's famous for.Retardohttp://stfuretard.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12471112.post-73866992774103494442009-08-30T22:05:09.433+01:002009-08-30T22:05:09.433+01:00The reason we fought Nazi Germany was nothing to d...The reason we fought Nazi Germany was nothing to do with "fighting fascism", it was that Germany's direct and urgent threat to us had become undeniably obvious. When Stalin's preferred role as Hitler's ally was so abruptly torn from him, Churchill then treated Stalin as an ally, though to begin with all that meant was that we sent him supplies. (And that Churchill suddenly had much less trouble from the Unions.) Surely there's nothing here worth debating - isn't it all bloody obvious?<br /><br /> As for Sen's rule about famines, it fails rather obviously with the Irish famine of the 1840s.deariemenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12471112.post-11968828470363765602009-08-30T21:44:10.051+01:002009-08-30T21:44:10.051+01:00I accept all the points you make except the last; ...I accept all the points you make except the last; I don't think there are any happy precedents for multiculturalism and Powell wasn't entirely wrong about everything, though on balance I think crank is a reasonable description.<br /><br />Your last paragraph, though, isn't logical. If we'd have started the war fighting the Soviets, they'd have been the immediate threat. We'd have allied with anyone against the immediate threat, as in fact we did.Peter Risdonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17792275403997179926noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12471112.post-51589587483885067212009-08-30T20:45:35.861+01:002009-08-30T20:45:35.861+01:00One was a high-ranking British politician who warn...<i>One was a high-ranking British politician who warned that black and white people mixing would lead to race war.</i><br /><br />Except that, in Sunny's inimitable way, that's not really what Powell said. <br /><br />This was a man who was outraged by the British treatment of the Mau Mau. He was also a minister with a hand in starting post war immigration to this country. Not exactly the behaviour of an out and out racist. <br /><br />He had knowledge of the intercommunal violence of India; something that people like Sunny blame entirely on the British, yet which had a much longer history. I think he foresaw the danger of that arising in the UK with unchecked immigration. It's notable that his estimates of future immigrant population were ridiculed at the time as being alarmist. Yet it turns out he underestimated.<br /><br />As for the jibe that if we had started the war fighting the Soviets we might have allied with the fascist. That's asinine. The fascists were an immediate threat that had to be contained. Having started a war against them, and then losing it, of course we allied with the devil to stop them. The first priority is to survive, only then can you be picky about choosing allies. During the Cold War we did ally with some pretty unsavoury people against the Soviet Union.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com