• @Raphael
    link
    1
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Same page:

    Slaughter of livestock

    During collectivization, the peasantry was required to relinquish their farm animals to government authorities. Many chose to slaughter their livestock rather than give them up to collective farms. In the first two months of 1930, kulaks killed millions of cattle, horses, pigs, sheep, and goats, with the meat and hides being consumed and bartered. In 1934, the 17th Congress of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) reported that 26.6 million head of cattle and 63.4 million sheep had been lost.[68] In response to the widespread slaughter, the Sovnarkom issued decrees to prosecute “the malicious slaughtering of livestock” (Russian: хищнический убой скота).[69]

    Resistance

    Thousands of Kazakhs violently resisted the collectivization campaign with weapons left over by the white army with 8 rebellions occurring in 1930 alone. [97] In the Mangyshlak Peninsula 15,000 rebels resisted between 1929 and 1931.

    Also

    Some kulaks responded by carrying out acts of sabotage such as killing livestock and destroying crops intended for consumption by factory workers

    They fought against collectivization thinking something would happen. They unleashed a famine upon themselves.

    EDIT: This part is so ridiculous I need to repeat it:

    reported that 26.6 million head of cattle and 63.4 million sheep had been lost.

    So much milk lost, could have fed so many people, you can bet there were millions of chickens too, millions of eggs that were never laid, kill the cattle, kill the natural cycle of reproduction, tonnes and tonnes of meat that were never born.

    Some reactionaries BURNED FARMS to oppose communism, no wonder they starved.

    • bioemerl
      link
      fedilink
      0
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      You do a very good job cherry picking, but all of these things together couldn’t starve a nation.

      At the end of the day what killed the Soviet Union was the fact that they.

      1. Created a system or the people producing the food weren’t making shit and had no incentive to actually work.

      2. Opted to try to blame rich people instead of their own shitty system for causing the famine.

      • @Raphael
        link
        21 year ago

        Killing millions of cattle and burning crops couldn’t starve a nation, hmm. OK, supremacist.

        • bioemerl
          link
          fedilink
          01 year ago

          The cattle part could could cause shortages, but at the end of the day when you don’t have cattle you can still feed people perfectly fine.

          You won’t get to eat nearly as much meat, but you can still eat.

          I’m mainly referring to the fact that you’re trying to blame the rebellion from the evil rich people for the cause of the famine instead of the very real economic misincentices created by the Soviet Union

          • @Raphael
            link
            11 year ago

            Burning crops, how many times do I need to repeat this part. They were also actively sabotaging collective farms.

            • bioemerl
              link
              fedilink
              1
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              And how many times do I have to repeat this part? The amount of sabotage going on was almost certainly not enough to cause mass famine.

              Mass famine would require mass action. If there was enough rebellion to starve the country, it would have deposed the Soviet Union entirely.

              The maximum number on the people actually having rebellions was what? 150,000? That’s nothing.

              No, the famine was caused by misaligned economic incentives which fucked the entire system.

              Also don’t forget that a very similar famine resulted from mao trying the same shit. This is not a uniquely Soviet phenomenon.

              • @Raphael
                link
                01 year ago

                Millions of… millions of cattle killed.

                Mao’s famine was caused by killing birds, because he did not listen to science. We must always listen to science. That thing could’ve happened if China were a Christian Theocracy. There have been countless famines in history but you only care about communist ones.

                • bioemerl
                  link
                  fedilink
                  11 year ago

                  Mao’s famine was caused by killing birds, because he did not listen to science.

                  You’re missing about 10 other bad decisions in there, and you’ll never guess what those 10 decisions were related to.

                  Millions of… millions of cattle killed.

                  Again. If we killed all the animals right now in every country in the world we would have…

                  More food.

                  Animals eat food. They provide less than they eat, so if you took all the food that would have gone towards cattle and instead put them towards humans, you’d see people eating more, not less.

                  I’m not totally going to say that that wasn’t a factor, but at the end of the day the famine in the Soviet Union still had a root cause.

                  Say it with me and say it again.

                  Shitty misaligned economic incentives.