Key Takeaways
- Famines result from human systems, not weather: Historical records show famines often occur during periods of food abundance when production is diverted for profit.
- Colonial systems deliberately engineered vulnerability: Forced cash crop production destroyed traditional mixed-farming systems designed for food security.
- When systems prioritize food, famine can be prevented: China avoided famine during severe drought through agricultural priorities and equitable distribution.
- Inequality determines who starves during food shortages: In India during drought, the entire impact falls on the poorest; in more equal systems, shortfalls are shared.
- Land seizure created permanent dependency: Colonial displacement of farmers onto marginal lands created cycles of soil exhaustion and forced reliance on imports.
Post 2: Hunger is Man-Made - Part 2: Engineered Vulnerability: When Famine Becomes an Act of History
The pervasive myth suggests that famines are inevitable natural phenomena—catastrophic acts of weather beyond human control. However, history reveals that famines do not occur simply because a “divine force willed it”. Rather, they result from the actions of human beings.
Historical records demonstrate that social and political structures are the true determinants of starvation. For instance, the great food shortages and famines in French medieval times often occurred during periods when food was not scarce but was being produced in large quantities and exported. Similarly, the intensity of famines in India increased significantly during the second half of the nineteenth century under colonialism, despite simultaneous increases in both food production and population. During the Bengal famine in 1943, the colonial government permitted rice to flood out of Bengal while huge profits were made, proving that when there are no controls, the profits of some mean the death of others.
The Chinese Contrast: Food First
The experience of China offers a dramatic demonstration of how historical and economic systems, rather than mere rainfall, dictate famine outcomes. Traditionally, China was known as the “land of famine,” suffering major crises nearly every year for over a thousand years.
However, when confronted with three years of drought (1972-1973)—the worst in three decades—China suffered no famine. The critical difference was a system where food comes first. The Chinese focused on creating an agricultural system less susceptible to weather variations. They executed massive water control efforts, such as taming the Hai River and digging hundreds of thousands of pump wells. Crucially, these projects utilized low capital expenditures, relying on millions of farmers who knew their labor would benefit them directly, ensuring they would never again suffer starvation. In China, if the total grain output decreases, the resulting shortfall is shared equitably. Conversely, in countries like India, the entire impact of drought falls almost exclusively on the poorest sectors, who suffer excessively as prices rise.
The Colonial Legacy: Engineering Scarcity
The vulnerability witnessed today in regions like the African Sahel is a direct result of a historical process, not an ancient failure to adapt to weather. The process began when colonial powers sought ways to force their new subjects to pay for the occupation.
For the colonizers of Africa, Asia, and Latin America, agriculture ceased to be a source of subsistence for local populations and became merely a means of extracting wealth.
- Forced Export Production: Colonial administrations often forced farmers to cultivate cash crops—such as peanuts, cotton, tobacco, and coffee—for export, primarily to serve the colonial power’s industrial or consumer demands. The shift was enforced through head taxes that farmers could only pay in French francs or through the sale of cash crops.
- Land Seizure and Displacement: The most fertile lands were often seized violently to establish huge plantations (latifundias) dedicated solely to export. Local farmers were pushed onto marginal, erosion-prone lands that were never suitable for intensive farming.
- Destruction of Traditional Systems: This forced monoculture replaced complex, traditional mixed-cropping systems that were ecologically sound and provided protection against disease, pests, and total failure due to weather. The continuous cultivation of peanuts or cotton on the same land rapidly exhausted the soil, creating a vicious cycle demanding even more land expansion to maintain yield.
In Mali, for instance, between 1965 and 1972, the area dedicated to the most important export crops (peanuts and cotton) increased by 50% to over 100%, even as devastating drought and widespread hunger grew. This destructive shift meant that food production declined dramatically while export crops flourished, often cultivated on the best land least affected by drought.
The central lesson remains: when widespread famine occurs, the primary question should not be “What terrible natural event caused it?” but rather, “Why was that society incapable of coping with bad luck?”.