The Irish Famine

espinolman · 25-06-2009 09:53PM

Here is a link that says the potatoe was introduced to Ireland in the second half of the sixteenth century , now here is the interesting thing , it says that consquently several famines occured throughout the 16 th and 17th centuries because of poor potatoe harvests , as far as i know , i think it was peru that potatoes originated from .

http://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&source=web&ct=res&cd=1&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwiki.answers.com%2FQ%2FWhat_foods_are_native_to_the_Irish_heritage&ei=KN1DSoyzDePLjAf4yKSmDw&usg=AFQjCNGAtlYIbmvxlMfEycBY5ez4iH0EJQ&sig2=M_ILoIexyp0MnI7G7OLqSQ

Liber8or · 25-06-2009 10:23PM

The potato was introduced to Ireland in the 16th century from the South Americas. One of the trade ships that returned from there carrying many goods which included the potato.

To those who claim food quotas from Ireland to England increased during the Famine, ofcourse they did. England was also suffering from potato blight, but it was not as detrimental to their foodstocks as they didn't rely totally on potato production. Food stocks were falling in England due to the failure rate and what does a business do when they need more stock? They order more. So, Ireland being the provincial provider of the potato to the U.K had to export greater numbers due to demand.

This is simply not enough grounds to argue it was an orchestrated attack. Perhaps reports sent to the government did not fully relay the extent of disaster on-going in Ireland at the time accurately. Maybe it was reported that a mild out break occurred and recovery was imminent. Finally, there is also the possibility that supplies in Ireland were miscalculated and it was believed that there was enough stock to support England and the native Irish.

To claim that this disaster was a deliberate and conceited plan to destroy the Irish population going back as far as the inception of the potato in Ireland is utterly ridiculous. If people are willing to believe that then why not say the potato blight, which originated in the United States, was a chemical attack by the U.S upon Europe to cripple it's economy and people so as to boost population and development in America.

I really am sick of the anti-British vibe I receive from Boards.ie and I, myself, am Irish. You want to know why we were conquered and ruled for 800 years? Because, all we did was complain and moan about everything around us and in turn this caused us to remain backward. Look at us now, 87 years of Irish Independence and people still can't build a bridge. Yeah, they ruled us, we won independence. Good for us, good for them. Or do we need 800 years of independence before we will start moving on, or even perhaps start moaning about our independence and say: "The British didn't treat us as bad back then as our own government do now!".

espinolman · 25-06-2009 10:55PM

Liber8or wrote: »

I really am sick of the anti-British vibe I receive from Boards.ie and I, myself, am Irish. You want to know why we were conquered and ruled for 800 years? Because, all we did was complain and moan about everything around us and in turn this caused us to remain backward. Look at us now, 87 years of Irish Independence and people still can't build a bridge. Yeah, they ruled us, we won independence. Good for us, good for them. Or do we need 800 years of independence before we will start moving on, or even perhaps start moaning about our independence and say: "The British didn't treat us as bad back then as our own government do now!".

Is what i am trying to point out here is that the famine would not have happened if the irish had stayed with their native diet of barley and root vegetables etc , but the native diet was changed by the introduction of the potatoe , and i would have to wonder , if there were famines in the 16th and 17th centuries caused by potatoe crop failures , then why did we not go back to barley ?

Mahatma coat · 26-06-2009 03:10AM

Yields, grow an acre of barley and an acre of potatoes, then see how many people you can feed off each.

Potatoes are what enabled the Irish population to reach 8 million. is it a conspiracy tho, or is it just another fine example of colonial mindset where the peasants in foreign countries are of no significance to the Ruling elites

GhostInTheRuins · 26-06-2009 09:05AM

Mahatma coat wrote: »

Potatoes are what enabled the Irish population to reach 8 million. is it a conspiracy tho, or is it just another fine example of colonial mindset where the peasants in foreign countries are of no significance to the Ruling elites

The thing is you can't even say they were peasants in a foreign country, not since the act of union.

Someone mentioned there was a famine in england at the same time, funny, I never hear about how bad that was, why is that?

SEPT 23 1989 · 26-06-2009 10:48AM

could never understand how people living on an island surrounded by water
filled with fish,died of hunger

Penn · 26-06-2009 10:55AM

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

could never understand how people living on an island surrounded by water
filled with fish,died of hunger

I don't think it was just hunger (apologies, I'm late to this thread and haven't read it all. Will do later)

It was an over-reliance on certain foods like potatoes, whereby when potatoes became scarce, a lot of people didn't really have anything else to eat. They became weaker, as did their immune systems, and became more susceptible to illnesses.

Also, this was in the 1850's. While we are on an island surrounded by water and fish, only people near the water would benefit. There was little on no transport for most, and many, once they began to starve, would have been too weak for long journeys. And even fish from lakes and stuff wouldn't have been enough with the large population back then. Wasn't there over 5 million in Ireland around then? We don't even have that many now with all the emmigration

suey71 · 26-06-2009 12:15PM

I pointed out earlier in this thread that there where 8,000,000 people in Ireland before the Famine and only 2,000,000 after it and another poster said that only 1,000,000 died and 1,000,000 emmigrated, now surely that would leave us with a population of 6,000,000 after the famine.

What happened to the other 4,000,000.

I am not anti British or pro IRA.

I just want to know the truth.

Potatoes came from Peru. In Peru there are and where countless different types of potatoes to choose from some of them had to have been more resistant to Blight than our spuds. Surely the English could have brought over some diferent types of potatoe and tried them out.
The Peruvians had growing the Potatoe down to an art form. They could have been asked for advice.

humanji · 26-06-2009 12:36PM

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

could never understand how people living on an island surrounded by water
filled with fish,died of hunger

Because of those bloody Spanish fishermen taking more than their quotas! :P Seiously though, as was said, it wasn't the lack of food that took the greatest toll, but the diseases that followed. And as paddyirishman85 said, only those beside the water would benefit from fishing, and even then they wouldn't have it down to an industry that could fish enough to feed the country.

suey71 wrote: »

I pointed out earlier in this thread that there where 8,000,000 people in Ireland before the Famine and only 2,000,000 after it and another poster said that only 1,000,000 died and 1,000,000 emmigrated, now surely that would leave us with a population of 6,000,000 after the famine.

What happened to the other 4,000,000.

I am not anti British or pro IRA.

I just want to know the truth.

Potatoes came from Peru. In Peru there are and where countless different types of potatoes to choose from some of them had to have been more resistant to Blight than our spuds. Surely the English could have brought over some diferent types of potatoe and tried them out.
The Peruvians had growing the Potatoe down to an art form. They could have been asked for advice.

The immediate effect of the famine was the death of a million and the emmegration of a million. Over the next 100 years the population was in a steep decline (up until the 1960's I think).

As for the potato, I'd imagine that not a single thought was put into what potatoes to bring over. They simply loaded ships with them and sent them home. I can't imagine much training being given to the peasants either.

daveyboy_1ie · 26-06-2009 02:13PM

Liber8or wrote: »

Taken from the Wolfe Tones Website. The guy who wrote the article you quoted above. Some musician, who creates (predominantly) pro-Irish, anti-English music and tales wrote an article on The Irish Famine and you expect it to be unbiased and based on facts?

Wolfe Tone was a protestant born Irish rebel politician mate, not the band we all know and love

samson09 · 26-06-2009 02:15PM

humanji wrote: »

I can't see it as a cover up at all. The British government saw the Irish as being less than animals. When people started to starve, the British government decided to keep the food exports going so they could take care of their own people and they just didn't give a second thought to the Irish. To say there was a conspiracy is assuming the Irish meant something to the government. They were an after-thought that someone else would take care of.

I agree with most of this, however in my opinion there was a cover up after the event happened (e.g. the official shipping/dock records for this time went "missing", how convenient is that eh?). I dont think that it was a planned attempt to reduce the Irish population, the truth is they just didnt really give a ****e about us and considered us lower than animals (similar to the way they treated the aborigines in australia).

samson09 · 26-06-2009 02:19PM

paddyirishman85 wrote: »

I don't think it was just hunger (apologies, I'm late to this thread and haven't read it all. Will do later)

It was an over-reliance on certain foods like potatoes, whereby when potatoes became scarce, a lot of people didn't really have anything else to eat. They became weaker, as did their immune systems, and became more susceptible to illnesses.

Also, this was in the 1850's. While we are on an island surrounded by water and fish, only people near the water would benefit. There was little on no transport for most, and many, once they began to starve, would have been too weak for long journeys. And even fish from lakes and stuff wouldn't have been enough with the large population back then. Wasn't there over 5 million in Ireland around then? We don't even have that many now with all the emmigration

This "over-reliance on the spuds" theory that is touted is nothing more than an attempt to cover up what really happened. I cant understand how anyone of sound mind can accept this theory, it just doesnt add up.

humanji · 26-06-2009 02:43PM

samson09 wrote: »

I agree with most of this, however in my opinion there was a cover up after the event happened (e.g. the official shipping/dock records for this time went "missing", how convenient is that eh?). I dont think that it was a planned attempt to reduce the Irish population, the truth is they just didnt really give a ****e about us and considered us lower than animals (similar to the way they treated the aborigines in australia).

Well I don't know about any documentaiton going missing, but I guess it wouldn't be surprising. Since there was a lot of people in the UK who would be shocked at the callousness of the government, it does fit that they might try and hide any evidence that would make them look bad.

26-06-2009 03:38PM

samson09 wrote: »

I remain skeptical that this figure is accurate but in the grand scheme of things the cause of the deaths is what is being discussed here.

Focus on the main topic...was the main cause of the famine a shortage of potatoes? Try offering something constructive to the discussion please!

So just be clear it's not important that you stated a falsehood as fact?

As has been pointed out it was a combination of factors of which the loss of potato crops was a big factor. (And the English being dicks was another.)

I don't see how replacing one oversimplified explanation with another oversimplified one, but with no supporting evidence, explains the Famine any better.

samson09 · 26-06-2009 03:46PM

King Mob wrote: »

So just be clear it's not important that you stated a falsehood as fact?

As has been pointed out it was a combination of factors of which the loss of potato crops was a big factor. (And the English being dicks was another.)

I don't see how replacing one oversimplified explanation with another oversimplified one, but with no supporting evidence, explains the Famine any better.

After receiving advice from numerous user of the forum, I would just like to state I will no longer be replying to any of KingMob's posts.

I am willing to discuss the topic further with anyone else who is interested.

26-06-2009 04:32PM

samson09 wrote: »

After receiving advice from numerous user of the forum, I would just like to state I will no longer be replying to any of KingMob's posts.

I am willing to discuss the topic further with anyone else who is interested.

I love it.
Get to the truth by ignoring tough and important questions!
The facts be damned!

Also loving the fact that a lot of people told you to ignore me.
It's very conspiratorial.

6th · 26-06-2009 04:56PM

Lads, grow up. Its sounding like when when one of the kids on the road tells my daughter not to play with another kid.

samson09 · 26-06-2009 05:11PM

King Mob wrote: »

I love it.
Get to the truth by ignoring tough and important questions!
The facts be damned!

Also loving the fact that a lot of people told you to ignore me.
It's very conspiratorial.

I will respond to anyone else asking the same questions you do.

samson09 · 26-06-2009 05:16PM

6th wrote: »

Lads, grow up. Its sounding like when when one of the kids on the road tells my daughter not to play with another kid.

I can say more on this forum while I'm not banned, which will inevitably happen if I continue childish arguments with certain individuals on this forum.
Yes, its silly, immature and childish but I have better things to do with my time (ie discuss important topics with people who are genuinely interested).

truebluedub · 26-06-2009 05:39PM

samson09 wrote: »

Does anyone have any stories passed down from relatives about what happened back then. I feel the version we were taught as children isnt a true reflection of what actually happened.

For an oral history try Famine Echoes by Cathal Póirtéir, while not overly nationalist in assigning blame it does target soupers and landlord's agents as groups who exploited the Famine or made matters worse. In general the oral history suggests that the Famine was seen as God's punishment for excess during good years.

In terms of the British Government's responsibility (or otherwise) for the Famine in general historians argue that the shift in policy from the Conservative attempts to intervene in the economy and relieve the situation, to the whigs free market policies was the extent of the British states responsibility.

6th · 27-06-2009 12:20AM

samson, you have the option of using the ignore function.

king_mob, if someone doesnt answer your questions bare in mind that they may have you on ignore. If you ask several times and they dont answer ... stop asking.

Liber8or · 27-06-2009 01:08AM

Wolfe Tone was a protestant born Irish rebel politician mate, not the band we all know and love

I am well aware of that, but the OP referenced his "facts" from The Wolfe Tones Website and a band member who wrote the article. My issue was with the credibility of the author.

Ostrom · 27-06-2009 01:13AM

samson09 wrote: »

This "over-reliance on the spuds" theory that is touted is nothing more than an attempt to cover up what really happened. I cant understand how anyone of sound mind can accept this theory, it just doesnt add up.

Sure it does.

Reliance on 'spuds' was comparatively late across much of Ireland, aside from (generally) east of the shannon, which had relied upon a relatively stable grain economy across much of the 18th and 19th centuries. A number of events/factors conspired to elevate the spud.

In Irish agricultural history, the 18th-19th century period is variously referred to as the 'agricultural revolution', despite the fact that Ireland did not modernize its cultivation techniques. Writers such as Arthur Young, Wakefield, Knight, Piers and Tighe had commented extensively on issues such as lack of capital, poor education and extensive subdivision as barriers to improvement.

Either way, the century before the famine is where enclosure, and the absolute rental regime* became most pronounced. Our best estimates suggest up to 50%+ of land west of the shannon was farmed in rundale partnership leasholdings, upon many estates where commons were being enclosured for grazing rather than cultivation. The net effect of this was a decline in available space for reclamation to accommodate newcomers, and a need to produce more surplus for sale to pay rent.

Combined with increasing popuation and spatial restriction, subdivision was made possible through the potato (various estimates suggest 1 acre was sufficient on marginal land to feed an average family). Holdings rated below £4 valuation were also charged poor law rates in many townlands, increasing the need for surplus, along with turbury levies, kiln charges and pound fees.

In short, potatoes replaced grain in cultivation ridges, allowing complete subsistence, combined with limited supplementary domestic industry and fishing (where available) to produce surplus.

Yields were especially high (Jim Collins has just published an excellent book on soil exhaustion under intensive cultivation), and declined steadily to 50% less per unit area by 1870.

Capitalizing landlords and rackrenting middlemen set the context - of maximum subsistence on minimum area, 'the brits' (which again needs careful specification) restrictive import policies and limited intervention contribute, along with of course an unfortunate succession of blights from (properly) 1846.

* The absolute and relative rental regimes refer to a general pursuit amongst large landowners, roughly corresponding to pre/post famine. Under absolute extraction, a maximum of direct surplus producers were sought, made possible through subdivision.

After the mid 19th century, and with the later assistance of the congested districts board and encumbered estates act, landlords consolidate holdings, encourage intensive mechanized production with rent extraction through greater volume of sale. The potato is key to the viability of the former

Also, please dont interpret this as an excuse for English non-intervention. This answer addresses your point about reliance on the potato only. But I would be happy to talk policy also

derry · 27-06-2009 12:53PM

Where is the problem to see that it was a total system of consparcy to kill off the irish that ensured the famine would kill off many Irish

The British ruling class were just as happy to kill of the Scots Welsh and low life poor of the Island od britian of that time but the irish were the ones that got it in the neck.

Mass movemennts of Scotish to take Irish lands starting in the north of Ireland were the policy to make the Irish landless and therefore kill them off as in those days no land no food therefore no Irish and that was a in your face genoside policy.
That plan failed from lack of funds.

The British ruling class now getting deeply into the Industrial revoltion which often killed many workers in that region mostly england from polution or industrial accidents etc didnt care for anything that was outside the ruling elites circles

A common theme from the British ruling class that a Ireland with a 10,000,000 population compared to the then UK population of less than 30Million represented a serious threat to be able to form a uprising and overthrow the rule of the English/Scotish/Welsh and what they believed the Irish royal family Crown based in mainland UK.

If they had a method to exterminate the Irish they would have used it instanly but they were torn betweeen the need to make profits and they needed the manpower that 10,000,000 people supplied pre famine periods.

However the Potatoe blight hapenned at a change over time where industrial equipment was displacing farm labour workers for production and a huge hike in food prices from a fall off in the UK mainland food production .

As ireland could still produce food with less workers and still make large profits the chance to exterminate a sizable chunk of the Irish population was to good a gift hourse to ignore and so the British policy that was dezined to exterminate the Irish with the rent system was cranked into full gear to achieve the desired results eg exterminate the Irish and best still for them make bigger profits while the food shortages kept prices higher

Even free food and cash from the USA sent to the Irish from the USA wasnt let land in Ireland as that would interfer with the extermation policy

However the full in your face outright extermination policy from suitable dragging of feet in a kinda of famine from ignorance of the facts was the method chosen by the ruling class, much as they ignored Industrial accidents as some sort of policy those stupid kids putting thier arms in machines what do you expect they have accidents, thye should learn faster.

The media of that period did pick up on the famine after time and as the details came out the British ruling class eased back from stopping charity from the USA to allowing the funds to be used on public building projects so the british got things like harbours built for virtually free and harbours meant more naval control of Ireland .

So its clear the policy was the same policy practised across the the whole region of the UK death from negliance or hidden famines or hidden pollution whatever would kill was to be used to cull the population numbers and keep the population supresssed to serf like conditions but really ramp up stuff if it involved culling the Irish population

Lucky for 3 million Irish who left the region they now with granchildren rule that DeVelara made now number 60,000 million Irish passports in circulation with another 150,000 million intitled to get an Irish population means the plan to exterminate the Irish failed and now there is probably more Irish than British in the planet .

But make no mistake the same royal family who decendent still belive in the policy of culling populations of the UK and the world are still planning and implementing the newwer culls in Africa with buying up the fertile regions and then doing the same tennant rental policy on the hapless natives of Africa

That explains most all the famines in Africa as Africa exports huge amounts of food and cash crops to the world while also culling the local population with famines and with bio wheapons like AIDS and with Vaccines with killer agents in them or giving one region guns for free knowing it will create a local war and kill many Africans

When the Robotic machines replace all human workers then the ruling elite will attempt to ramp up and cull the entire world population by 90% and my best guess they will attempt to cull 100% of the Republic of Ireland as the final feck you too to the Irish for pissing in the eyes of the royal family of past era.

Dont get me wrong I have no issues with any joe soap brits who also will risk to die some 90% of them in the new NWO cull .
But I do say it straight the BRITISH ROYAL FAMILY ARE SCUM who only plan every day how to kill you period and have joined forces with the Bilderberg group elete forces of the world for the NWO cull and they will also kill the Unionists just as quick as the southern Irish as that is what they always do from way back in history kill the lowwer serf class when they are excess to requirements

So basically learn your history the British invented concentration camps
The British and Dutch royal families sponsored the rise of Hitler

The British and Dutch royal families are big benifactors of arms sales world wide that kill and maim millions every year

The Biderberg group who own possibly 80% of the planet own most all vaccine production so can easily lace the vaccines with killer agents

The Bilderberg group own and control most all the milatary production and food production and even water plants so if they start a CULL THYEY CAN TURN OF THE FOOD AND WATER and then vaccine you foceably against the pig flu but the vaccine is meant to kill you

The Bilderberg group is heavily represented by very rich royal families of Europe who intend to keep the worlds population at a serfdom level and cull them when they have full robotics in place and no need to have these useless eaters hanging around and probably have life extension tecknology which they wont allow the remaining slave serf from the cull who survive to share in this life extension solutions

Yor fighting some real bad bastards and Dermot Gleeson who was from AIB is a regular attendeee to the Bilderberg group and is one of these SOB traitors to the Republic of Ireland

more info at www.info-wars.org

Derry

Ostrom · 27-06-2009 01:05PM

derry wrote: »

If they had a method to exterminate the Irish they would have used it instanly but they were torn betweeen the need to make profits and they needed the manpower that 10,000,000 people supplied pre famine periods.

However the Potatoe blight hapenned at a change over time where industrial equipment was displacing farm labour workers for production and a huge hike in food prices from a fall off in the UK mainland food production .

So basically learn your history the British invented concentration camps
The British and Dutch royal families sponsored the rise of Hitler

I'm speechless.

I await your sources....?

Ill start with the obvious falshhoods: Population never reached 10 million, and insustrial equipment was not displacing farm labourers, they became concentrated in greater numbers as subsistence tenants on conacre leases.

Good thing all those blights occured in succession - cant imagine how they would have engineered that one.

Did it involve giant spray tanks?

Undergod · 27-06-2009 01:09PM

It's pretty ridiculous to suggest the blight, or the resulting famine, was deliberately and malicously engineered. But what it is obvious, is that the ruling class didn't really do much to help the situation. Why would they care about poor people dying?

27-06-2009 01:25PM

derry wrote: »

more info at www.info-wars.org

Well here's your problem.

You're not actually going to find any information there.
At least the kind that's based on reality and backed by evidence.

samson09 · 27-06-2009 04:01PM

Interesting info. on famine, especially on exports during the height of the famine.

From http://www.nde.state.ne.us/SS/irish/irish_pf.html

EXPORTS

Ireland Before and After the Famine, author Cormac O’Grada documents that in 1845, a famine year in Ireland, 3,251,907 quarters (8 bushels = 1 quarter)) of corn were exported from Ireland to Britain. That same year, 257,257 sheep were exported to Britain. In 1846, another famine year, 480,827 swine, and 186,483 oxen were exported to Britain. (28.)

Cecil Woodham-Smith, considered the preeminent authority on the Irish Famine, wrote in The Great Hunger; Ireland 1845-1849 that, "...no issue has provoked so much anger or so embittered relations between the two countries (England and Ireland) as the indisputable fact that huge quantities of food were exported from Ireland to England throughout the period when the people of Ireland were dying of starvation." (29.)
"Although the potato crop failed, the country was still producing and exporting more than enough grain crops to feed the population. But that was a 'money crop' and not a 'food crop' and could not be interfered with." (30.)

According to John Mitchel, quoted by Woodham-Smith, "Ireland was actually producing sufficient food, wool and flax, to feed and clothe not nine but eighteen millions of people," yet a ship sailing into an Irish port during the famine years with a cargo of grain was "sure to meet six ships sailing out with a similar cargo."
One of the most remarkable facts about the famine period is that there was an average monthly export of food from Ireland worth 100,000 Pound Sterling. Almost throughout the five-year famine, Ireland remained a net exporter of food. (31.)

asdasd · 29-11-2009 07:36PM

I dont normally come into this forum. The debate is going around in circles. In my view it doesn't matter if people starve through action, or inaction, if a "foreign" government would not have allowed their own population to starve. Both are racist.

Of course I am aware that Ireland was part of the UK at the time, so theoretically we were part of the same "people", or State. However if England was running short of food and got food from Ireland, this is - in itself - racist. Let the Irish starve, let the English live.

If Britain had the possibility of people starving in London ( which like all cities is in constant food deficit) and took food by force from people who are in food surplus ( the Irish producers of food) then this action is racist anyway.

And in real famines the cities die off, independent farmers will only sell their surplus to cities, the cities starve. In the Dark Ages continuous famines caused the city populations to be decimated, because farmers did not sell into the cities. In the UK during the famine London's population grew, and the West of Ireland fell. Only one of these areas was in food deficit, and it wasnt the West of Ireland.

Compare:

The reaction of the British during WWII to a food shortage in Britain was to bring in rationing, and the food shortage in Britain was very large ( they could only produce 70% of their calorie needs in Britain).

If that 30% had been allowed to go to hell, without rationing (because it would have affected the poor more than the rich and middle classes who would be able to buy food to satisfy 100% of their calories, or more) then at the very minimum 30% of people would have died. Probably more because 20-50% of your food calories would not be enough, and disease would kill more than hunger.

Ireland in 1840 was not in food shortage. The UK was in minor deficit. Food could shave been imported from the colonies. Yet, the producers of food died. There was no rationing.

No need for conspiracy.

mysterious · 30-11-2009 04:02AM

asdasd wrote: »

I dont normally come into this forum. The debate is going around in circles. In my view it doesn't matter if people starve through action, or inaction, if a "foreign" government would not have allowed their own population to starve. Both are racist.

Of course I am aware that Ireland was part of the UK at the time, so theoretically we were part of the same "people", or State. However if England was running short of food and got food from Ireland, this is - in itself - racist. Let the Irish starve, let the English live.

If Britain had the possibility of people starving in London ( which like all cities is in constant food deficit) and took food by force from people who are in food surplus ( the Irish producers of food) then this action is racist anyway.

And in real famines the cities die off, independent farmers will only sell their surplus to cities, the cities starve. In the Dark Ages continuous famines caused the city populations to be decimated, because farmers did not sell into the cities. In the UK during the famine London's population grew, and the West of Ireland fell. Only one of these areas was in food deficit, and it wasnt the West of Ireland.

Compare:

The reaction of the British during WWII to a food shortage in Britain was to bring in rationing, and the food shortage in Britain was very large ( they could only produce 70% of their calorie needs in Britain).

If that 30% had been allowed to go to hell, without rationing (because it would have affected the poor more than the rich and middle classes who would be able to buy food to satisfy 100% of their calories, or more) then at the very minimum 30% of people would have died. Probably more because 20-50% of your food calories would not be enough, and disease would kill more than hunger.

Ireland in 1840 was not in food shortage. The UK was in minor deficit. Food could shave been imported from the colonies. Yet, the producers of food died. There was no rationing.

No need for conspiracy.

The thing is, to have a population of 8.1 million to half that, is not some food issue or some deficit.

It was planned.

The english crown has been helbent on trynig to wipe out for 900 years for more than saving their own deficit issue I can assure you. From my perspective its precisely why the UK and USA keep ireland on the monitor to this day. Our own government are at their knees to the british and US powers of be. Now Europe.

They made sure we were dependant on one crop, and then put the blight on it and bam, sure enough our dependance on the one food became our biggest killer.

It happened, so I think its very suiteable to make it a conspiracy theory. The same way JFK was shot. People want to get to the bottom as to why this was done.

The Irish Famine

Comments