• bioemerl@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    You do a very good job cherry picking, but all of these things together couldn’t starve a nation.

    At the end of the day what killed the Soviet Union was the fact that they.

    1. Created a system or the people producing the food weren’t making shit and had no incentive to actually work.

    2. Opted to try to blame rich people instead of their own shitty system for causing the famine.

    • Raphael@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      Killing millions of cattle and burning crops couldn’t starve a nation, hmm. OK, supremacist.

      • bioemerl@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        The cattle part could could cause shortages, but at the end of the day when you don’t have cattle you can still feed people perfectly fine.

        You won’t get to eat nearly as much meat, but you can still eat.

        I’m mainly referring to the fact that you’re trying to blame the rebellion from the evil rich people for the cause of the famine instead of the very real economic misincentices created by the Soviet Union

        • Raphael@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          Burning crops, how many times do I need to repeat this part. They were also actively sabotaging collective farms.