💾 Archived View for gemini.spam.works › mirrors › textfiles › politics › SPUNK › sp001118.txt captured on 2022-03-01 at 16:47:50.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Suggested Title: Famine in Africa & Ireland
Two articles, 2nd is '150 years on: The Irish famine, why
one million died' [ws46].
******** Why are people starving in Africa ********
from Workers Solidarity No 33
[1991?]
It's hard to know how any one can consider
capitalism a viable system when looking at
the situation of the less developed countries.
After the millions raised by Live Aid, it seems
unreal that people are going hungry. A recent
UN report estimates that 30 million people
face starvation. Yet EC beef, butter and wine
mountains rot in European warehouses,
farmers are ploughing crops back into the
land, in US corn belt fields of wheat are
burnt.
There's a bit of a modern myth that the problems
of Africa are either there own fault (over
population, wars) or beyond anyones control
(drought, desertification). Though it's true these
are contributary factors, many other countries
cope with these same problems without the huge
loss of life suffered by Africa (for example China,
even England has been through war and drought).
The reasons cited by the UN for the deaths of
these people are as follows; lack of resources from
the international community, poor planning and
falling prices on the commodity markets
(especially for cocoa and coffee). Companies selling
to Africa have tightened up credit terms while
external debt levels continued to increase.
COCOA AND COFFEE
When Africa was first colonised, land was switched
from production of food to feed the local population
to the production of 'cash crops' such as cocoa, tea,
coffee and sugar. These crops were exported to
colonising countries at low prices. In a similar way
corn was grown in Ireland during the 1845 famine.
Today coffee and cocoa is still a major export of 15
African countries as they need the cash provided to
keep up with debt repayments. Cocoa prices have
fallen to there lowest level in 15 years while coffee
is at similarity low level.
DEBT
In the early 1970's many African governments
borrowed heavily. About 40% of debt is owed
directly to other governments. In almost all cases
this money was lent on the condition that it be
used to purchase arms from the donor country or
that subsides be granted to multinationals based in
the donor country. In this way the third world
country is made to pay twice over. 25% of the debt
is owed to the IMF and the World Bank. Today
Africa's debt is estimated at 270 billion dollars.
Repayments consume 30 per cent of export
earnings.
UNITED NATIONS
It's obvious that the governments of the U.S.,
China and Europe aren't really interested in
combating the crisis and these are the
governments that run the UN. The last program
of aid implemented by the United Nations
(according to their own report) in 1986 met with
little sucess. This was the plan the UN promised
would revive Africa's economies. Instead, in their
own words "By the end of 1990, it had become
evident that the African crisis had indeed
deepened...the average African continued to get
poorer and suffer a persistent fall in an already
meagre living standard". Now, five years later,
they add that even if their latest plan was fully
implemented (they call it ambitious) the average
income per head in sub-Saharan Africa would only
reach US$700 per annum in 25 years time.
Rather than offering the solution the governments
that make up the UN itself that are the problem.
THE FUTURE
So it doesn't look as if the situation will
fundamentally change. But then, why should the
Western governments want things any different?
Africa provides the bosses with markets for the
surplus goods we produce as well as cheap labour
and raw materials. Live Aid showed that workers
of the West are not willing to let Africa starve (as
some Greens would argue), however it also showed
that while the means of production and all the
resulting profits are in the hands of the bosses,
individual attempts at resolving the problems will
do little more than make a dent in the problem.
The type of massive development that Africa
requires will only come about when the resources of
this world are distributed according to need and not
according to profit.
Aileen O'Carroll
************ Putting the record straight ************
on the Irish Famine 1845-49
Why 1,000,000 died
from WS 46 [1995]
The Famine was not just a result of British
Government incompetence or the greed of a few
landlords. Andrew Blackmore explores what happens
when you have a system that puts profits for the
few above all else.
The conditions for Irish peasants leading up to the
famine accentuated what was to be the worst
disaster in Europe in the 19th century. Before the
famine struck nearly half of rural families lived
in windowless, mud cabins of one room. They were
the lucky ones. The unemployed roamed the country,
begging and sleeping in ditches.
With a population of 8 million, land was scarce,
and many families had to survive on half an acre of
land. They could only do this by growing potatoes
to feed them through the winter months.
When the potato blight (a type of fungus) struck in
1845, mass starvation was inevitable. Families who
relied on the potato to keep them alive were left
with nothing. Even those who grew grain or barley
were faced with a stark choice; sell the food in
order to pay the rent, or eat the food and be
evicted.
As the years went on, the blight continued.
Millions lost everything, their homes, their few
possessions, and of course, their lives.
The rich too had to tighten their belts. But not as
much. In 1847, while the famine reached a peak of
death and despair, the Dublin 'season' continued as
before in a lively fashion. With the exception of a
few notable cases, the rich felt their only
obligation was to make a donation to charity. After
that they were free to hunt and party, as they
always had done. Lord Bessborough, the Lord
Lieutenant of Ireland, who died in that year
complained that what had made him poorly was not
the famine but too much 'balls and drawing rooms'
These landlords continued to make valuable cash
through the export of foodstuffs such as grain, as
well as wool and flax. All through the famine they
were exporting food that could have kept people
alive. John Mitchell (who published the United
Irishman) claimed that for every ship that came to
Ireland with food, there were six ships sailing
out.
As far as landlords were concerned they had the
right to do so. The right of the rich few to sell
food to the highest bidder, came before the needs
of the majority for food for survival. And the
right of the rich to collect rent came before the
right to housing. The British government supported
that 'right' by bringing in the 'Coercion Act'
enabling it to declare martial law, and a curfew
between sunset and sunrise wherever they wanted.
The 'Coercion Act' and other previously existing
laws were used to evict tenants who could not pay
rent. The soldiers and constabulary were used to
protect food for export from the starving.
In order to avoid mass revolt the government set up
public works schemes. Impoverished peasants were
asked to build roads that went from nowhere to
nowhere, for such low wages that they could hardly
buy enough food to live on.
Even this work was not available for many people.
For example, in Mayo in 1846, 400,000 people
applied for 13,000 jobs.
Along with such a pathetic response, the government
pushed much of the responsibility to feed the poor
onto the shoulders of charities. Soup kitchens were
set up, by religious groups and charities
throughout Ireland. In some cases the soup was so
watery that doctors would advise people not to
drink it!
Even if the charities had been able to feed
everyone that was not the point. The right of
people to food and the right to life should have
come before everything else.
The famine caused roughly 1,000,000 deaths and
1,500,000 emigrants. In the aftermath, the
population of Ireland was to halve to 4,000,000. It
is an example of a terrible tragedy, but one that
is inevitable only when the profit motive comes
before people.