"I don't ever want us ever to have to beg for food grains." - (former indian PM) Indira Gandhi
Perhaps the western nations, especially former imperialist ones, need to study indian history more closely before proposing self-serving policies that deliberately ignore the concerns of developing nations:
> While the war was raging in Europe, North Africa and the Pacific – a war in which an estimated 2.5 million Indians fought for Britain, with 87,000 being killed – back home in Bengal, a horrendous famine struck ... Churchill’s War Cabinet “ordered the build-up of a stockpile of wheat for feeding European civilians after they had been liberated. So 170,000 tons of Australian wheat bypassed starving India – destined not for consumption but for storage,” as well as exporting rice from India at a time when millions were dying back in Bengal. “The War Cabinet’s shipping assignments made in August 1943, shortly after Amery had pleaded for famine relief, show Australian wheat flour travelling to Ceylon, the Middle East, and Southern Africa – everywhere in the Indian Ocean but to India. Those assignments show a will to punish,” continues Mukerjee. This imperialist logic will not surprise many with a knowledge of the history of the British Empire – they did the same in Ireland in the 1840s, among other places ... ( - https://historycollection.com/julian-apostate-incredible-lif... )
-----
> In an unprecedented move, the President had taken charge of overseeing the aid supplies, almost becoming a desk officer reviewing the grain shipments on a monthly basis. With these checks and short supplies, a nearly 'ship-to-mouth' regimen had been imposed. Simply put, with short-tether at play, the supply lines had been tightened, ensuring only enough grains were released to last about a month's supply. This was POTUS playing hardball and holding onto the shipments ... A series of liberalization reforms were undertaken, that among other things, included a new agricultural policy, delicensing of various industries, ease on imports, and a massive 37% devaluation of the Indian rupee. Johnson was impressed ... But by July, the relations were already strained as Johnson was livid with India's strong stance on US actions in Vietnam. When told that the Indians were saying exactly the same thing as the UN Secretary-General and the Pope were, Johnson retorted: "The Pope and U Thant don't need our wheat."
> ... On August 23, 1966, US Aid Administrator Bell and Secretaries Freeman and Rusk urged the release of 2.5 million tons of wheat to avoid breaks in the supply. The President refused to act, and in response, he wrote, "We must hold onto all the wheat we can. Send nothing unless we break an iron-bound agreement by not sending." ... Even the American press — including the New York Times and Washington Post — criticised the US pressure tactics on a country facing a famine situation. ( - https://owlcation.com/humanities/Indo-US-Relations-Famine-Ai... )
Ultimately, this US pressure and extortion forced India to focus on self-sufficiency in agriculture, and pushed us towards a closer relationship with the USSR who were more "understanding" and "kind". After the Bangladesh liberation war, Indo - US relationship had sunk to a new low and India stopped accepting food aid from the US.
It was this kind of exploitation and bullying that taught India the valuable lesson of the need to be self-reliant in agriculture, to preserve its sovereignty. Today, despite our billion+ population and frail agricultural economy, India is the largest producer (25% of global production) of pulses in the world and the largest producer of milk, jute and pulses. It has the world's second-largest cattle population. It is the second-largest producer of rice, wheat, sugarcane, cotton and groundnuts, as well as the second-largest fruit and vegetable producer, accounting for 10.9% and 8.6% of the world fruit and vegetable production, respectively.
Churchill was the epitome of the anti-Indian/African/Asian brutal enslavement & exploitation mentality of the Colonial powers. Their evil still continues to this day, especially in Africa.
Tens of millions of Indians literally starved and died on the streets of India due to Churchill and his British administration bleeding fertile India dry of its food because he considered Indians to be less than human.
The British genocides on the Hindus and other Indians are among the greatest Holocaust of human history.
British deliberately massacred many hundreds of millions of people in India throughout their brutal rule.
Even ignoring Partition and civil riots, here are just ballpark numbers of the deaths in the artificial famines caused by the British in India.
* The Great Bengal Famine: 1769 - 1770:
10+ Million Deaths
* Madras City & Chalisa Famines: 1782 - 1783:
11+ Million Deaths
* Doji Bara Famines: 1791 - 1792:
10+ Million Deaths
* Agra Famine: 1837 - 1838:
1 Million Deaths
* Upper Doab Famine: 1860 -1861:
2 Million Deaths
* Orissa Famine: 1866:
1+ Million Deaths
* Rajputana Famine: 1868 - 1870:
1.5 Million Deaths
Churchill was mostly to blame for these artificial famines, but the British had been doing such evils to the Indians for a long time even before Churchill and the world wars:
Additional casualties colonization has caused/exasperated...
"Malthusian economics, convenient interpretations of Adam Smith, and social-Darwinism combined to form an ideology that killed 5.5 million Indians only in the British territories between 1876 and 1878 and anything between 6.1 and 10.3 million people in all of India. The Famine Commission justified Lord Lytton’s reasoning, Davis writes, saying that if help was meted out during the famine, people would assume that the poor were entitled to it at all times. British trade could not take a backseat for the sake of Indian lives."
Bengali cuisine today is a living testament to these times. We have dishes that use jute leaves (a waste product from the jute being produced), tree barks, mango/jackfruit seeds, even just water leftover from cooking rice (people would beg at the doors of richer houses for the rice water). We have separate dishes for ripe/unripe/overripe fruits and vegetables. Nothing could be wasted. My friends would joke in school that “God you bengalis eat everything,” but there is a grim history behind it. — source, am bengali, grew up listening to grandparents’ stories.
A number of reasons but primarily British Colonia policy.
When the Japanese invaded Burma in 1942 there was a huge influx of refugees into Bengal, approximately 500,000 people which strained the local economy. Additionally the British Raj government had laws which forced local suppliers of goods such as food and textiles to sell to the military at a fixed low price but no price controls for the civilian market so any goods making it to the civilian market were already hugely inflated in price.
What really kicked off the famine that killed over 3 million people though was the British decision to enact a scorched earth policy in bengal in anticipation of a Japanese invasion, burning crops in the fields and destroying stockpiled food supplies.
Several members of the British government in India did in fact plead to Churchills cabinet during this period for relief shipments of food to stave off the growing famine from 1942-1943 including Viceroy Linlithgow, Secretary of State for India Leo Amery, supreme commander of Southeast Asia Admiral Louis Mountbatten, Commander in-Chief of British forces in India Claude Auchinleck, and Viceroy Archibald Wavell (Linlithgow’s replacement), but all of them were rejected. Churchill’s cabinet also refused offers of relief shipments from several other nations leading to speculation the the famine was deliberately engineered by Churchill and his government as a punitive response to the Quit India movement which is likely true.
I should also add that when asked about it Churchill apparently laughed and said the Indians deserved it for ‘breeding like rabbits’.
aside from the policies of colonial regime mentioned above ,
there was also wartime money printing by colonial regime to finance the war effort, which I'm pretty sure you all know does what to food prices....
______
Capitalist British colonialism killed more people than even the highest estimates for all of communism... India alone... Over 40 years.
TL;DR Best guess, India had about 165 million excess mortalities from 1880-1920.
"It is widely recognized that famine became more regular and deadly under British colonialism than in the Mughal period (Davis, 2002; Tharoor, 2017). There is evidence of a particularly severe mortality crisis in the late 19th century. Demographers have used India’s censuses to reconstruct life expectancy and the crude death rate between 1881 and 1920 (Dyson, 2018, p. 126, p. 279-280). Table 3 reports this evidence. As Allen has suggested that India’s welfare standards in the 16th century were similar to Western Europe’s, for comparison we also include average figures for England in the 16th- and 17th-century (data from Wrigley & Schofield, 1981). Both the English and Indian figures are the results of modern demographic reconstructions, so changes in the mortality rate are not affected by changes in the rate of registration. We see that in the 1870s India’s crude mortality rate had already risen considerably higher than early modern England. The situation deteriorated thereafter, with mortality rising by 19%, and life expectancy plummeting to 22 years. If we estimate excess mortality from 1891 to 1920, with the average death rate of the 1880s as normal mortality, we find some 50 million people lost their lives under the aegis of British capitalism (see Appendix V for a full discussion).16 But this estimate must be considered conservative. India’s 1880s death rate was already very high by international standards. If we measure excess mortality over England’s 16th- and 17th-century average death rate, we find 165 million excess deaths in India between 1880 and 1920 (Appendix V). This figure is larger than the combined number of deaths from both World Wars, including the Nazi holocaust."
Basically read up on the east India trading company, a capitalist corporation. They kept putting taxes up even during the numerous famines that happened. It lead to forced labour being used to attempt to keep up with the ever increasing taxation on the land, once taxes failed the company would seize your land. You should pick up The Anarchy: The Relentless Rise of the East India Company by William Dalrymple. Really good overview.
They also destroyed the cotton industry of India so less competition for uk based cotton industry. That’s how Manchester cotton boomed.
It was all done for maximum profit for the shareholders by a corporation with state backing to commit crimes against humanity.
This is different as the corporation has the power to do whatever it wants, which non capitalist colonialism are you referring to?
I’m not arguing they do exist today although the social club they set up in London does and the wealth generated is still held by a small number of British people never mind all the cultural artefacts stolen during company rule now held in museums or the millions of people starved to death still have impacts to name a few things.
I’m just stating that these early international corporations did operate in a capitalist way which lead to more deaths than any other event I’m aware of in such a short time.
> While the war was raging in Europe, North Africa and the Pacific – a war in which an estimated 2.5 million Indians fought for Britain, with 87,000 being killed – back home in Bengal, a horrendous famine struck ... Churchill’s War Cabinet “ordered the build-up of a stockpile of wheat for feeding European civilians after they had been liberated. So 170,000 tons of Australian wheat bypassed starving India – destined not for consumption but for storage,” as well as exporting rice from India at a time when millions were dying back in Bengal. “The War Cabinet’s shipping assignments made in August 1943, shortly after Amery had pleaded for famine relief, show Australian wheat flour travelling to Ceylon, the Middle East, and Southern Africa – everywhere in the Indian Ocean but to India. Those assignments show a will to punish,” continues Mukerjee. This imperialist logic will not surprise many with a knowledge of the history of the British Empire – they did the same in Ireland in the 1840s, among other places ... ( - https://historycollection.com/julian-apostate-incredible-lif... )
-----
> In an unprecedented move, the President had taken charge of overseeing the aid supplies, almost becoming a desk officer reviewing the grain shipments on a monthly basis. With these checks and short supplies, a nearly 'ship-to-mouth' regimen had been imposed. Simply put, with short-tether at play, the supply lines had been tightened, ensuring only enough grains were released to last about a month's supply. This was POTUS playing hardball and holding onto the shipments ... A series of liberalization reforms were undertaken, that among other things, included a new agricultural policy, delicensing of various industries, ease on imports, and a massive 37% devaluation of the Indian rupee. Johnson was impressed ... But by July, the relations were already strained as Johnson was livid with India's strong stance on US actions in Vietnam. When told that the Indians were saying exactly the same thing as the UN Secretary-General and the Pope were, Johnson retorted: "The Pope and U Thant don't need our wheat."
> ... On August 23, 1966, US Aid Administrator Bell and Secretaries Freeman and Rusk urged the release of 2.5 million tons of wheat to avoid breaks in the supply. The President refused to act, and in response, he wrote, "We must hold onto all the wheat we can. Send nothing unless we break an iron-bound agreement by not sending." ... Even the American press — including the New York Times and Washington Post — criticised the US pressure tactics on a country facing a famine situation. ( - https://owlcation.com/humanities/Indo-US-Relations-Famine-Ai... )
Ultimately, this US pressure and extortion forced India to focus on self-sufficiency in agriculture, and pushed us towards a closer relationship with the USSR who were more "understanding" and "kind". After the Bangladesh liberation war, Indo - US relationship had sunk to a new low and India stopped accepting food aid from the US.
It was this kind of exploitation and bullying that taught India the valuable lesson of the need to be self-reliant in agriculture, to preserve its sovereignty. Today, despite our billion+ population and frail agricultural economy, India is the largest producer (25% of global production) of pulses in the world and the largest producer of milk, jute and pulses. It has the world's second-largest cattle population. It is the second-largest producer of rice, wheat, sugarcane, cotton and groundnuts, as well as the second-largest fruit and vegetable producer, accounting for 10.9% and 8.6% of the world fruit and vegetable production, respectively.