Hitler executed about 8 million people, about 6 million of whom were jews.
Stalin starved about 20 million people.
Mao oversaw the Great Famine, following his order to kill all the sparrows in China, which lead to the starvation of 60 - 80 million people, depending on who’s counting.
So, all the famine, death and destruction caused by capitalist exploitation of third world countries like india and most of the africsn continent can also directly be tied back to capitalism right? Then its at least an intellectually consistent framework youre operating under.
And doing that, the most conservative death toll, from WHO, is around 9 million excess deaths, A YEAR.
multiply that by, again lets be conservative and lets say just the last 30 years. So from the middle of the nineties to now, thats 270 million excess deaths just from imposed famine like conditions. So not even counting other deaths following the exploitation of workers and ressources in third world countries
if we just do the math, it seems capitalism is many orders of magnitude more deadly than even psychos like Stalin.
Why the hell do deaths under communism always seem to include every person who died from any cause not from old age, while the deaths of fascism only include people who were executed?
Also, how so many gloss over the MANY famines suffered under capitalism. Ones that range into the 10s of millions as well, and it wasn’t just one Great Famine, the British alone are responsible for like a dozen, or more, across their empire, especially if we are discussing the Pakistani/India/Bangladesh region. Ones where there was food, but that food had a high profit margin, so knowing that there wasn’t enough other food to go around, they still shipped it to places that would not have seen mass famine had they not received that food. The most famous being Ireland’s, because they are the white Europeans that suffered from these economic policies. Not to mention the absolute insanity that was European colonialism in sub Saharan Africa. However, we like to talk about those like they happened in isolation from each other, or as a consequence of acts of god. Total leading to well over the 100 million claimed to have been the consequence of communism, and which is disingenuously bloated.
Mao sucked. Harsh authoritarian, was 90% of the support for the Khmere Rouge, had no fucking clue how to run a country he took control of, etc. However he isn’t quite the outlier people make him to be when you really examine what happened under the capitalist empires.
Because a communist dictator coming into power is often followed by severe mismanagement and famine and the deaths of millions. It’s not the same sort of evil as killing people deliberately, but they’re equally dead.
So, all the famine, death and destruction caused by capitalist exploitation of third world countries like india and most of the africsn continent can also directly be tied back to capitalism right? Then its at least an intellectually consistent framework youre operating under.
And doing that, the most conservative death toll, from WHO, is around 9 million excess deaths, A YEAR.
multiply that by, again lets be conservative and lets say just the last 30 years. So from the middle of the nineties to now, thats 270 million excess deaths just from imposed famine like conditions. So not even counting other deaths following the exploitation of workers and ressources in third world countries
if we just do the math, it seems capitalism is many orders of magnitude more deadly than even psychos like Stalin.
So, all the famine, death and destruction caused by capitalist exploitation of third world countries like india and most of the africsn continent can also directly be tied back to capitalism right?
Sure, if that’s the comparison you’re making. But “capitalism” Vs Mao is not a comparison that makes sense.
You could maybe count Churchill’s famine in India or his jolly little wars in Africa if you want to be argumentative. Or just accept that Mao caused millions of deaths through pig-headed incompetence and move on.
you said “Because a communist dictator coming into power is often followed by severe mismanagement and famine and the deaths of millions. It’s not the same sort of evil as killing people deliberately, but they’re equally dead.”
Mao killed tens of millions. Capitalism kills hundreds of millions, and continues to do so.
If were gonna play the killscore game, might as well get the full scoreboard
Tsk. Mao is not the same sort of concept as capitalism. Has he killed more or fewer people than mosquitoes or bananas? What about too short green traffic lights? Moonless nights? All questions that make the same amount of sense. Mate.
Added: Feel free to count a famine caused by a capitalist leader against that person’s score. That’s being consistent.
The death tolls im stating are coming from WHO, world health organization, and are the resultat of capitalist exploitation in the area.
If the famines leading to the death of millions, are the fault of communism through the negligence of Mao as you stated earlier, then why tf is similar famines, created by the negligence of capitalist power holders, not the fault of capitalism?
or do you want me to find out the names of the CEOs so we can put blame entirely on the individual? That would then mean that the deaths in china was only the fault of Mao as well, and has nothing to do with the communism.
either the economic system is partly at fault or it isnt. Pick a lane pal.
Wikipedia lists the range of estimates for the famine as 15-46 million, so your numbers are beyond even the high end of that.
It also lists the number killed by the Nazis in mass killings as 11 million, which doesn’t account for at least 39 million deaths in the European theater of WWII, which Hitler started.
I’m not sure why you feel the need to minimize Hitler’s death toll or inflate Mao’s, as if even the lower range was not a dismal failure. The policy was so much of a failure that overall life expectancy in China stagnated, before continuing it’s meteoric rise. It was so bad that it was almost as bad as before the CPC came to power. You can see it very clearly around 1960 in this graph:
For comparison, we can see what Hitler did to German life expectancy (to say nothing of the rest of Europe’s):
They’re saying that (I think) the life expectation rise after the PRC was established is just coincidental with a global trend of life expectancies rising and that communism had no role in improving life expectancy.
Then my response is that it’s very odd that the KMT wasn’t able to emulate that “coincidental” rise in life expectancy when they were in power and it had already started increasing in other countries.
And as for communism playing a role, let me use an analogy. Recently there was a story where an Eritrean immigrant, Ebro Ahmed, saved a runaway bus full of children by jumping into it and hitting the brakes. He told the news that it was his Muslim faith that inspired him to jump into the bus. That guy is obviously a hero for what he did. But that doesn’t mean that only an Eritean, only an immigrant, or only a Muslim, could have done what he did in that situation.
Any sort of person who believed any sort of thing could have, if they so desired and were in a position to do so, instituted land reform which overall greatly increased food security, and anyone could have trained up a bunch of doctors and sent them out to the countryside to vaccinate hundreds of millions of people and provide access to modern medicine for the first time in history. And anyone who had done those things in China would have seen the same increase in life expectancy. And, had someone else done so, they might well have avoided blunders like the Great Leap Forward.
Unfortunately, nobody else did. The Qing dynasty did nothing to help the peasants. The Western colonizers did nothing to help the peasants. The warlords did nothing to help the peasants. The KMT did nothing to help the peasants. The Japanese did nothing to help the peasants. Every political faction that had actually existed in China was perfectly willing to just stand there and let the bus full of children roll on by, except for the communists.
In other countries, that wasn’t the case. As their graph shows, in, say, Sweden, there were people who were not communists who took actions that helped the people and raised life expectancy. Communists do not, in fact, have a monopoly on implementing policies that help people or raise life expectancy. Being led by communists does not somehow magically create better living conditions. It does so when communists implement good policies that raise living conditions. And if they’re led by someone who’s not a communist but implements the same policies, then it will produce the same effects.
Honestly, when I saw that out loud, it’s so obvious that it’s crazy I have to say it in the first place. It feels as though my actual position of, “Mao helped raise the life expectancy of the Chinese people,” has been bizarrely twisted and misinterpreted into “COMMUNISM #1! EVERYONE ELSE SUCKS! MAO IS THE ONLY PERSON WHO DID ANYTHING GOOD EVAH!1!!” No doubt, this sort of automatic twisting of beliefs is where the whole accusation of “tankie” comes from, because anyone who has a single good thing to say about Mao is automatically assumed to be “stanning” or “simping” him, or whatever silly word they’re using this week, and assigned all sorts of positions regardless of what they actually said.
Hitler executed about 8 million people, about 6 million of whom were jews.
Stalin starved about 20 million people.
Mao oversaw the Great Famine, following his order to kill all the sparrows in China, which lead to the starvation of 60 - 80 million people, depending on who’s counting.
So, all the famine, death and destruction caused by capitalist exploitation of third world countries like india and most of the africsn continent can also directly be tied back to capitalism right? Then its at least an intellectually consistent framework youre operating under.
And doing that, the most conservative death toll, from WHO, is around 9 million excess deaths, A YEAR.
multiply that by, again lets be conservative and lets say just the last 30 years. So from the middle of the nineties to now, thats 270 million excess deaths just from imposed famine like conditions. So not even counting other deaths following the exploitation of workers and ressources in third world countries
if we just do the math, it seems capitalism is many orders of magnitude more deadly than even psychos like Stalin.
Why the hell do deaths under communism always seem to include every person who died from any cause not from old age, while the deaths of fascism only include people who were executed?
Also, how so many gloss over the MANY famines suffered under capitalism. Ones that range into the 10s of millions as well, and it wasn’t just one Great Famine, the British alone are responsible for like a dozen, or more, across their empire, especially if we are discussing the Pakistani/India/Bangladesh region. Ones where there was food, but that food had a high profit margin, so knowing that there wasn’t enough other food to go around, they still shipped it to places that would not have seen mass famine had they not received that food. The most famous being Ireland’s, because they are the white Europeans that suffered from these economic policies. Not to mention the absolute insanity that was European colonialism in sub Saharan Africa. However, we like to talk about those like they happened in isolation from each other, or as a consequence of acts of god. Total leading to well over the 100 million claimed to have been the consequence of communism, and which is disingenuously bloated.
Mao sucked. Harsh authoritarian, was 90% of the support for the Khmere Rouge, had no fucking clue how to run a country he took control of, etc. However he isn’t quite the outlier people make him to be when you really examine what happened under the capitalist empires.
Because a communist dictator coming into power is often followed by severe mismanagement and famine and the deaths of millions. It’s not the same sort of evil as killing people deliberately, but they’re equally dead.
So, all the famine, death and destruction caused by capitalist exploitation of third world countries like india and most of the africsn continent can also directly be tied back to capitalism right? Then its at least an intellectually consistent framework youre operating under.
And doing that, the most conservative death toll, from WHO, is around 9 million excess deaths, A YEAR.
multiply that by, again lets be conservative and lets say just the last 30 years. So from the middle of the nineties to now, thats 270 million excess deaths just from imposed famine like conditions. So not even counting other deaths following the exploitation of workers and ressources in third world countries
if we just do the math, it seems capitalism is many orders of magnitude more deadly than even psychos like Stalin.
Sure, if that’s the comparison you’re making. But “capitalism” Vs Mao is not a comparison that makes sense.
You could maybe count Churchill’s famine in India or his jolly little wars in Africa if you want to be argumentative. Or just accept that Mao caused millions of deaths through pig-headed incompetence and move on.
Im just being logically consistent here m8.
you said “Because a communist dictator coming into power is often followed by severe mismanagement and famine and the deaths of millions. It’s not the same sort of evil as killing people deliberately, but they’re equally dead.”
Mao killed tens of millions. Capitalism kills hundreds of millions, and continues to do so.
If were gonna play the killscore game, might as well get the full scoreboard
Tsk. Mao is not the same sort of concept as capitalism. Has he killed more or fewer people than mosquitoes or bananas? What about too short green traffic lights? Moonless nights? All questions that make the same amount of sense. Mate.
Added: Feel free to count a famine caused by a capitalist leader against that person’s score. That’s being consistent.
The death tolls im stating are coming from WHO, world health organization, and are the resultat of capitalist exploitation in the area.
If the famines leading to the death of millions, are the fault of communism through the negligence of Mao as you stated earlier, then why tf is similar famines, created by the negligence of capitalist power holders, not the fault of capitalism?
or do you want me to find out the names of the CEOs so we can put blame entirely on the individual? That would then mean that the deaths in china was only the fault of Mao as well, and has nothing to do with the communism.
either the economic system is partly at fault or it isnt. Pick a lane pal.
Tsk.
Wikipedia lists the range of estimates for the famine as 15-46 million, so your numbers are beyond even the high end of that.
It also lists the number killed by the Nazis in mass killings as 11 million, which doesn’t account for at least 39 million deaths in the European theater of WWII, which Hitler started.
I’m not sure why you feel the need to minimize Hitler’s death toll or inflate Mao’s, as if even the lower range was not a dismal failure. The policy was so much of a failure that overall life expectancy in China stagnated, before continuing it’s meteoric rise. It was so bad that it was almost as bad as before the CPC came to power. You can see it very clearly around 1960 in this graph:
For comparison, we can see what Hitler did to German life expectancy (to say nothing of the rest of Europe’s):
Hmm…
Relevancy?
They’re saying that (I think) the life expectation rise after the PRC was established is just coincidental with a global trend of life expectancies rising and that communism had no role in improving life expectancy.
Then my response is that it’s very odd that the KMT wasn’t able to emulate that “coincidental” rise in life expectancy when they were in power and it had already started increasing in other countries.
And as for communism playing a role, let me use an analogy. Recently there was a story where an Eritrean immigrant, Ebro Ahmed, saved a runaway bus full of children by jumping into it and hitting the brakes. He told the news that it was his Muslim faith that inspired him to jump into the bus. That guy is obviously a hero for what he did. But that doesn’t mean that only an Eritean, only an immigrant, or only a Muslim, could have done what he did in that situation.
Any sort of person who believed any sort of thing could have, if they so desired and were in a position to do so, instituted land reform which overall greatly increased food security, and anyone could have trained up a bunch of doctors and sent them out to the countryside to vaccinate hundreds of millions of people and provide access to modern medicine for the first time in history. And anyone who had done those things in China would have seen the same increase in life expectancy. And, had someone else done so, they might well have avoided blunders like the Great Leap Forward.
Unfortunately, nobody else did. The Qing dynasty did nothing to help the peasants. The Western colonizers did nothing to help the peasants. The warlords did nothing to help the peasants. The KMT did nothing to help the peasants. The Japanese did nothing to help the peasants. Every political faction that had actually existed in China was perfectly willing to just stand there and let the bus full of children roll on by, except for the communists.
In other countries, that wasn’t the case. As their graph shows, in, say, Sweden, there were people who were not communists who took actions that helped the people and raised life expectancy. Communists do not, in fact, have a monopoly on implementing policies that help people or raise life expectancy. Being led by communists does not somehow magically create better living conditions. It does so when communists implement good policies that raise living conditions. And if they’re led by someone who’s not a communist but implements the same policies, then it will produce the same effects.
Honestly, when I saw that out loud, it’s so obvious that it’s crazy I have to say it in the first place. It feels as though my actual position of, “Mao helped raise the life expectancy of the Chinese people,” has been bizarrely twisted and misinterpreted into “COMMUNISM #1! EVERYONE ELSE SUCKS! MAO IS THE ONLY PERSON WHO DID ANYTHING GOOD EVAH!1!!” No doubt, this sort of automatic twisting of beliefs is where the whole accusation of “tankie” comes from, because anyone who has a single good thing to say about Mao is automatically assumed to be “stanning” or “simping” him, or whatever silly word they’re using this week, and assigned all sorts of positions regardless of what they actually said.