Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!ut-sally!husc6!necntc!adelie!mirror!ishmael!inmet!janw
From: janw@inmet.UUCP
Newsgroups: sci.bio
Subject: Re: No Limits to Growth
Message-ID: <121700003@inmet>
Date: Sat, 11-Apr-87 16:51:00 EST
Article-I.D.: inmet.121700003
Posted: Sat Apr 11 16:51:00 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 19-Apr-87 04:31:45 EST
References: <533@cpocd2.UUCP>
Lines: 76
Nf-ID: #R:cpocd2.UUCP:-53300:inmet:121700003:000:3494
Nf-From: inmet.UUCP!janw    Apr 11 16:51:00 1987


[howard@cpocd2.UUCP ]
>In article <831@nrcvax.UUCP> terry@minnie.UUCP (Terry Grevstad) writes:
>>Actually, from what I've read, Ethiopia was doing fine until a civil
>>war started, and the scorched earth policy of the winning side
>>coincided with a drought.
>>
>>The whole thing is was and will be political.
>     ^^^^^^^^^^^

>I do not deny that politics have a great influence on peoples lives, but
>anyone who has seen "before" and "after" satellite photos of Lake Chad will
>recognize the absurdity of the above absolute claim.  Terry and I must not
>read the same magazines.

Why? Terry *said* there was a drought.  Droughts do not  have  to
mean  famine  -  *provided  "hoarding" and "profiteering" are al-
lowed*. Droughts had happened before; the farmers had stocked  up
in  advance and weathered them. The (pseudo)Marxist economics and
politics destroyed all that.  Surpluses  were  confiscated,  so
that farmers stopped producing more than enough for their minimal
needs.  Hoarding was punished; trading was  punished.  Successful
farmers  were forcibly relocated for political reasons. They were
forcibly collectivized. Forced labor and compulsory political ac-
tivities,  and  frequent jailing left farmers little time to work
on their land. But let the famine victims speak for themselves...

The following is from *Ethiopia: The Communist Uses of Famine*,
*Commentary*, April 1986, p.32. 		

] Not one refugee interviewed at the Yabuus (Sudan) relief camp
] cited drought as a major or even subsidiary cause of famine in
] the region of Ethiopia which they had fled. 

] Rather, the two most frequently noted reasons were the  4-5  days
] per  week  of  compulsory work on collective farms and a category
] labeled simply "imprisonment prevents farm work",  which  says  a
] lot about the state's priorities.

] Despite a desperate need for increased food production,  peasants
] were  jailed  on  such charges as failure to pay taxes, resisting
] the confiscation of land, trading  outside  government  channels,
] refusing  to  arrest  a neighbor as part of militia duty, working
] the fields during a political seminar  or  literacy  class  (fre-
] quently  mentioned by refugees), suspicion of assisting the Oromo
] Liberation Front, and publicly objecting to government decisions.

] Still another problem was the confiscation of guns. The major
] result of this policy was to give free rein to foraging animals,
] such as baboons, who were capable of destroying an entire year's
] harvest unless killed or driven away. [..]

Read it all, it is very instructive.

>Meanwhile, the desert marches on.

A misleading statement - considering that the amount of arable
land  in  the  world keeps growing. Much is lost, more is gained.
The green revolution is opening former wastelands to agriculture.

>Anyway, the point I was making was simply that famine exists in the world
>today.  Saying that it might not have to if politics didn't get in the way
>is irrelevant.

If that's the point, then it is itself irrelevant to the  "limits
to  growth" discussion. Famine exists - but is it caused by popu-
lation growth? *That's* the point.

Well, it is definitely *not*. There would be more sense in  blam-
ing  famine  on  *underpopulation*. World population has grown,
famine has receded. Worldwide, there's a  tremendous  glut  of
grain now (even Sudan, Ethiopia's neighbor, has a large surplus).

Politically induced famine is no more relevant than anorexia.

			Jan Wasilewsky