4 ms·

The author wants you to believe the Irish Famine was caused by free-market extremism. This couldn't be further from the truth. Ireland wasn’t starving because o

The author wants you to believe the Irish Famine was caused by free-market extremism. This couldn't be further from the truth. Ireland wasn’t starving because of free markets — it was starving because Britain’s mercantilist policies blocked it from importing food from outside the empire. The British forced Ireland to rely on their overpriced grain, banned direct imports from the U.S. and Europe, and kept tariffs high with the Corn Laws — all while millions starved. That’s not laissez-faire. That’s imperial economic control designed to keep Ireland dependent on politically connected domestic producers. O’Toole’s omission of this amounts to deception. He’s twisting history to fit a narrative, blaming capitalism while letting British trade restrictions, protectionism, and outright exploitation off the hook. The Irish Famine was a disaster of Britain's mercantilist policies. Whitewashing that to score political points for his illiberal domestic agenda is an insult to history.

DoughnutHole 2y ago
Why not both? The mercantilist economic policy of the UK was an abject failure that made its people poorer and prevented the import of cheap food. But the UK’s unwillingness to provide sufficient aid once the famine had already started was motivated by laissez-faire politics and a Malthusian belief that the famine was the Irish’s own fault for overbreeding. Remember that the government with the support of the Whigs and Radicals actually repealed the Corn Laws, it was just too little too late. Ironically the Whig’s free market beliefs if enacted in policy much earlier might have prevented the famine from happening in the first place, while simultaneously meaning they weren’t interested in properly mitigating it once it did happen.
- ETH_start 2y ago
  The blame has to ultimately be placed at the feet of the mercantilist policies. Once they restricted trade, they were responsible for the welfare of the Irish. So, these arguments that they made, that the Irish were responsible for overbreeding, were not a product of laissez-faire ideology, just their bastardized understanding of it.

DoughnutHole 2y ago

Why not both? The mercantilist economic policy of the UK was an abject failure that made its people poorer and prevented the import of cheap food. But the UK’s unwillingness to provide sufficient aid once the famine had already started was motivated by laissez-faire politics and a Malthusian belief that the famine was the Irish’s own fault for overbreeding. Remember that the government with the support of the Whigs and Radicals actually repealed the Corn Laws, it was just too little too late. Ironically the Whig’s free market beliefs if enacted in policy much earlier might have prevented the famine from happening in the first place, while simultaneously meaning they weren’t interested in properly mitigating it once it did happen.

ETH_start 2y ago
The blame has to ultimately be placed at the feet of the mercantilist policies. Once they restricted trade, they were responsible for the welfare of the Irish. So, these arguments that they made, that the Irish were responsible for overbreeding, were not a product of laissez-faire ideology, just their bastardized understanding of it.