That’s also not the Irish famine though.
Irish peasants grew potatoes because it was more or less the only thing nutrient dense enough to sustain them, due to ever decreasing lot-sizes. Then potato blight + English landlords forcing continued export of food, despite an ongoing famine.
Arguing that someone is willing to pay for food, thus all crops are cash crops is like arguing capitalism has been around forever because people traded in the middle ages
No don’t you understand, potatoes are just a cash crop because they were sold for cash! I blocked the guy
Arguing that someone is willing to pay for food, thus all crops are cash crops is like arguing capitalism has been around forever because people traded in the middle ages
fucking exactly, this definition of cash crop literally would define any surplus of any crop as a cash crop. Your farm produces enough rice to sell? Ah you’re growing cash crops!! I’m getting angry that i even need to argue this
Sorry Im probably one of those users. Blame the devs though, I still need a disable inbox replies so i can stop being so mad about stuff on the internet, definitely not a me problem
Irish tenant farmers grew potatoes as a subsistence crop, while the wealthy landlords grew wheat and oats as a cash crop to export. It is in fact a great illustration how growing food by itself will not stave off a famine when the social relation demands that thousands must starve for a few to get even wealthier.
Re: your last point, I have been careful not to blame capitalism specifically in this thread. Wheat was grown as a cash crop in Ancient Rome. The development of the slaver latifundia system leading to the economic marginalisation of the plebeians was a major source of class conflict in their society.
That’s also not the Irish famine though.
Irish peasants grew potatoes because it was more or less the only thing nutrient dense enough to sustain them, due to ever decreasing lot-sizes. Then potato blight + English landlords forcing continued export of food, despite an ongoing famine.
Arguing that someone is willing to pay for food, thus all crops are cash crops is like arguing capitalism has been around forever because people traded in the middle ages
No don’t you understand, potatoes are just a cash crop because they were sold for cash! I blocked the guy
fucking exactly, this definition of cash crop literally would define any surplus of any crop as a cash crop. Your farm produces enough rice to sell? Ah you’re growing cash crops!! I’m getting angry that i even need to argue this
Real cash crops have never been tried, youre just talking about cash croporatism.
Anyway Yeah I need breaks from hexbear once in a while due to how users like to act, so I can relate
Sorry Im probably one of those users. Blame the devs though, I still need a disable inbox replies so i can stop being so mad about stuff on the internet, definitely not a me problem
We’re all those users at different times. (Except for me of course). No worries
Irish tenant farmers grew potatoes as a subsistence crop, while the wealthy landlords grew wheat and oats as a cash crop to export. It is in fact a great illustration how growing food by itself will not stave off a famine when the social relation demands that thousands must starve for a few to get even wealthier.
Re: your last point, I have been careful not to blame capitalism specifically in this thread. Wheat was grown as a cash crop in Ancient Rome. The development of the slaver latifundia system leading to the economic marginalisation of the plebeians was a major source of class conflict in their society.