4 ms·

I don't think the Bengal famine is that simple, certainly not to say "purposefully creating"...

• shmde 5y ago
  Time and time again it has been proved and backed by research that it was indeed purposefully created. I don't understand why people aren't able to swallow that Churchill was responsible for the devastating famine. Its the same everywhere, even in r/history subreddit people just straight away deny Churchill was responsible for the famine. I understand that he is hailed as a hero for WW2 but he definitely has 3 million Indian's blood in his hand. https://theprint.in/science/proved-by-science-winston-churchill-not-nature-caused-1943-bengal-famine/214942/ https://theprint.in/science/proved-by-science-winston-church...
  • mutatio 5y ago
    Let's not hijack the thread with politics. I will say this, there was no motive for it to be "purposefully created" - that is nonsense, try and think about it objectively for a second. It's far more nuanced than that. The issue here is the motivation for your post, do you interject any mention of Gandhi with critiques of his character / behaviour?
    • mrguyorama 5y ago
      Churchill was well known for genuinely hating indian people. Also Great Britain kind of had a habit of either creating, or worsening food shortages for political reasons. For example, the British parliament refused to stop grain exports from Ireland during the potato famine, or provide free grain to hungry people, because they thought that the Irish were lazy and giving them free things would make them lazier (sound familiar?)