The association between authoritarianism and famine is a developing field of anthropology: https://iss.u-tokyo.ac.jp/en/news/2026/04/20260512.html (this paper’s conclusion that elections and media oversight is what makes democratization effective at famine prevention I think misses the forest for the trees. The ultimate conclusion I think when you factor in famines that are largely ignored by western media such as the dust bowl in the 1930s is that famines are structural and that it is when the workers who own the means of production, the means of production are used more effectively)
@Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml , I’m frankly a little surprised you find this to be bullshit when you’ve been so vocal about that workers must be fully compensated for their labor. Ultimately the reason authoritarian structures fail to meet the needs of a famished people is because of a capitalist class restricting the laborer from the output of their labor. Systems that encourage solidarity and mutual respect consistently do a better job of getting people fed.
So do you mind giving me more to work with about what your objection is than just “bullshit?” because it seems to me like this should be in alignment with your core beliefs that you’ve posted everywhere on Lemmy.
Your first link leads to an article with exactly zero substantiating evidence included, no description of anything resembling a methodology or a source for data. What it does include is a direct reference to the National Museum of the Holodomor Genocide, Kyiv, which seems like a pretty obvious indication of where this source’s biases lie. This is what happens when you post the first source you find without bothering to actually read it.
Your second link leads to a posting for a seminar about “authoritarian regimes”. No data, no methodology, no evidence just like the first one. You also refer directly to it as a paper, indicating that you also didn’t actually bother reading your own source. Says “Social Research Seminar” right at the top of the page and says when it’s being held more than once, clearly not a research paper or study.
what is your problem with the concept? i can put together more tomorrow after work but… what the fuck is this? and why the need to call me a halfwit? you won’t tell me, specifically, what your objection to the notion the a small number of people controlling the means of production instead of the workers creating favorable conditions for famine is. it feels on my end of the conversation like you just want to be mad and that i have received your ire.
to reiterate: it’s really far away from your usual leftist ethos, especially in leftist memes, that i need some input as to what your problem is before i put in the work because otherwise this seems like you’re just trolling to troll.
as for the first result thing, i was just trying to introduce you to the concept that it’s not just me saying this. i promise i can find more it’s just been a few years since i had access to academic journals. the idea that capitalist greed causes famines is not a new notion, it shouldn’t be hard to find more.
i’m not going to address the “developing field” “critique” since it’s patently absurd to expect academia to remain static, especially when it has such a white supremacist legacy. applying marxist analysis to food systems and political theory in conjunction should be catnip for a person proudly calling themselves a “tankie” in their bio. you’re attacking this is so absurd i don’t even know what to say. it makes me discount every tangentially leftist thing you’ve ever said, to be honest, because if you don’t want to investigate how capitalist greed causes famine… how do you even call yourself a leftist?
Your assertions are not substantiated by your sources, or by reality, and I suspect that you know it.
I don’t call myself a leftist, that’s what liberals who are lying about being liberals call themselves. I am a communist. I have little patience and no respect for people who co-opt leftist imagery and ideas to support counterproductive nonsense.
i firmly believe that the workers need to own the means of production to all be fed. it’s like… the very most core thing to my beliefs from growing up in a deeply impoverished community. but since you so firmly believe i act in bad faith i’m going to have to recommend we disengage as this conversation cannot ever lead anywhere productive.
This would be an interesting concept in a city builder/colony sim type game - you can choose to give loose directives and have the people achieve it in their own way, but you have little control over how it happens, or you can choose to micromanage, which reduces the ‘free will’ of the people, meaning you now need mo manage more of the colony’s day-to-day needs.
Urbek plays with this a little but certainly not to the degree i think you’re envisioning. you can implement policies that give you short term economic boosts but they almost always come with long term disadvantages. meanwhile you can also plan for long term prosperity in your city but that requires more patience.
i think i perceive what you’re describing as being more like Anno, Banished, or Timberborn but with short term incentives to overwork your workers and long term incentives to not. i think that might actually wind up hewing pretty close to dwarf fortress or gnomoria, just with some slightly different interactions
That’s the gist yeah… like, I could create a directive that there needs to be a mine near some resource, and people would naturally go make the mine, but then make some houses, shops, roads, schools, etc. and eventually the mine becomes a village.
Or, I could assign specific people to do nothing buy build a mine, others to build houses, roads and so on. That would allow the projects to build faster and exactly how I want, but they would exclusively do the task assigned until they starve/revolt/etc. unless I pay flawless attention to assignments and re-assign workers to new tasks or put them on leave to take care of themselves.
Maybe have a research/policy tree that allows me to unlock things like work shifts, weekends/time off, resource allocation, markets, etc. all with their own benefits and ramifications.
i’d structure it so the tutorial gives the impression you’re supposed to oppress your people but make it so the win conditions are easier to achieve if you don’t union bust
that’d be fun, but I think people would catch on pretty quick unless there were some bottleneck events that can be achieved that way if things are well-planned, but would be “easier” done by going authoritarian… but that approach could have consequences further down the line. Just enough to keep that temptation going
i.e.: Town B needs resources from Town A, but they’re a long distance apart and nobody is building roads. You could plan a road and hope people build it in time, or you can force people to build it, at the risk of injury/death, which also increases anti-government sentiments. However, not building the road causes Town B to go into famine, but that could have been avoided if you placed the towns a little closer together or something
There is nothing resembling good faith discussion happening here, but I’m willing to toe the line for the opportunity to carefully explain for anyone who can read exactly how full of shit y’all are
@Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml , I’m frankly a little surprised you find this to be bullshit when you’ve been so vocal about that workers must be fully compensated for their labor. Ultimately the reason authoritarian structures fail to meet the needs of a famished people is because of a capitalist class restricting the laborer from the output of their labor. Systems that encourage solidarity and mutual respect consistently do a better job of getting people fed.
So do you mind giving me more to work with about what your objection is than just “bullshit?” because it seems to me like this should be in alignment with your core beliefs that you’ve posted everywhere on Lemmy.
Your first link leads to an article with exactly zero substantiating evidence included, no description of anything resembling a methodology or a source for data. What it does include is a direct reference to the National Museum of the Holodomor Genocide, Kyiv, which seems like a pretty obvious indication of where this source’s biases lie. This is what happens when you post the first source you find without bothering to actually read it.
Your second link leads to a posting for a seminar about “authoritarian regimes”. No data, no methodology, no evidence just like the first one. You also refer directly to it as a paper, indicating that you also didn’t actually bother reading your own source. Says “Social Research Seminar” right at the top of the page and says when it’s being held more than once, clearly not a research paper or study.
You should be embarassed and silent.
/disengage
Removed by mod
what is your problem with the concept? i can put together more tomorrow after work but… what the fuck is this? and why the need to call me a halfwit? you won’t tell me, specifically, what your objection to the notion the a small number of people controlling the means of production instead of the workers creating favorable conditions for famine is. it feels on my end of the conversation like you just want to be mad and that i have received your ire.
to reiterate: it’s really far away from your usual leftist ethos, especially in leftist memes, that i need some input as to what your problem is before i put in the work because otherwise this seems like you’re just trolling to troll.
as for the first result thing, i was just trying to introduce you to the concept that it’s not just me saying this. i promise i can find more it’s just been a few years since i had access to academic journals. the idea that capitalist greed causes famines is not a new notion, it shouldn’t be hard to find more.
i’m not going to address the “developing field” “critique” since it’s patently absurd to expect academia to remain static, especially when it has such a white supremacist legacy. applying marxist analysis to food systems and political theory in conjunction should be catnip for a person proudly calling themselves a “tankie” in their bio. you’re attacking this is so absurd i don’t even know what to say. it makes me discount every tangentially leftist thing you’ve ever said, to be honest, because if you don’t want to investigate how capitalist greed causes famine… how do you even call yourself a leftist?
Your assertions are not substantiated by your sources, or by reality, and I suspect that you know it.
I don’t call myself a leftist, that’s what liberals who are lying about being liberals call themselves. I am a communist. I have little patience and no respect for people who co-opt leftist imagery and ideas to support counterproductive nonsense.
i firmly believe that the workers need to own the means of production to all be fed. it’s like… the very most core thing to my beliefs from growing up in a deeply impoverished community. but since you so firmly believe i act in bad faith i’m going to have to recommend we disengage as this conversation cannot ever lead anywhere productive.
This would be an interesting concept in a city builder/colony sim type game - you can choose to give loose directives and have the people achieve it in their own way, but you have little control over how it happens, or you can choose to micromanage, which reduces the ‘free will’ of the people, meaning you now need mo manage more of the colony’s day-to-day needs.
Urbek plays with this a little but certainly not to the degree i think you’re envisioning. you can implement policies that give you short term economic boosts but they almost always come with long term disadvantages. meanwhile you can also plan for long term prosperity in your city but that requires more patience.
i think i perceive what you’re describing as being more like Anno, Banished, or Timberborn but with short term incentives to overwork your workers and long term incentives to not. i think that might actually wind up hewing pretty close to dwarf fortress or gnomoria, just with some slightly different interactions
That’s the gist yeah… like, I could create a directive that there needs to be a mine near some resource, and people would naturally go make the mine, but then make some houses, shops, roads, schools, etc. and eventually the mine becomes a village.
Or, I could assign specific people to do nothing buy build a mine, others to build houses, roads and so on. That would allow the projects to build faster and exactly how I want, but they would exclusively do the task assigned until they starve/revolt/etc. unless I pay flawless attention to assignments and re-assign workers to new tasks or put them on leave to take care of themselves.
Maybe have a research/policy tree that allows me to unlock things like work shifts, weekends/time off, resource allocation, markets, etc. all with their own benefits and ramifications.
i’d structure it so the tutorial gives the impression you’re supposed to oppress your people but make it so the win conditions are easier to achieve if you don’t union bust
that’d be fun, but I think people would catch on pretty quick unless there were some bottleneck events that can be achieved that way if things are well-planned, but would be “easier” done by going authoritarian… but that approach could have consequences further down the line. Just enough to keep that temptation going
i.e.: Town B needs resources from Town A, but they’re a long distance apart and nobody is building roads. You could plan a road and hope people build it in time, or you can force people to build it, at the risk of injury/death, which also increases anti-government sentiments. However, not building the road causes Town B to go into famine, but that could have been avoided if you placed the towns a little closer together or something
Stop being insulting and derailing good faith discussion
There is nothing resembling good faith discussion happening here, but I’m willing to toe the line for the opportunity to carefully explain for anyone who can read exactly how full of shit y’all are
Lowk troll-y behaviour from you in general but OK
I’m right