Bengal Famine Quotes

In 1770, for instance, a famine in Bengal clobbered the company’s revenue. British legislators saved it from bankruptcy by exempting it from tariffs on tea exports to the American colonies. Which was, perhaps, shortsighted on their part: it eventually led to the Boston Tea Party, and the American Declaration of Independence.7 You could say the United States owes its existence to excessive corporate influence on politicians.

The British conquered Bengal, the richest province of India, in 1764. The new rulers were interested in little except enriching themselves. They adopted a disastrous economic policy that a few years later led to the outbreak of the Great Bengal Famine. It began in 1769, reached catastrophic levels in 1770, and lasted until 1773. About 10 million Bengalis, a third of the province’s population, died in the calamity.11

An economically devastated Bengal became too weak to fight back the famine of 1769–70; it is estimated that 10 million, out of a population of 30 million, died. ‘In fact, British control of India started with a famine in Bengal in 1770 and ended in a famine – again in Bengal – in 1943. Working in the midst of the terrible 1877 famine that he estimated had cost another 10 million lives, Cornelius Walford calculated that in the 120 years of British rule there had been thirty-four famines in India, compared with only seventeen recorded famines in the entire previous two millennia,’ writes Robins. The Mughal response to famine had been good governance: embargo on food export, anti-speculation regulation, tax relief and free kitchens. If any merchant short-changed a peasant during a famine, the punishment was an equivalent weight in flesh from his body. That kept hoarding down.

This is the fly in the ointment of free-market capitalism. It cannot ensure that profits are gained in a fair way, or distributed in a fair manner. On the contrary, the craving to increase profits and production blinds people to anything that might stand in the way. When growth becomes a supreme good, unrestricted by any other ethical considerations, it can easily lead to catastrophe. Some religions, such as Christianity and Nazism, have killed millions out of burning hatred. Capitalism has killed millions out of cold indifference coupled with greed. The Atlantic slave trade did not stem from racist hatred towards Africans. The individuals who bought the shares, the brokers who sold them, and the managers of the slave-trade companies rarely thought about the Africans. Nor did the owners of the sugar plantations. Many owners lived far from their plantations, and the only information they demanded were neat ledgers of profits and losses. It is important to remember that the Atlantic slave trade was not a single aberration in an otherwise spotless record. The Great Bengal Famine, discussed in the previous chapter, was caused by a similar dynamic – the British East India Company cared more about its profits than about the lives of 10 million Bengalis. VOC’s military campaigns in Indonesia were financed by upstanding Dutch burghers who loved their children, gave to charity, and enjoyed good music and fine art, but had no regard for the suffering of the inhabitants of Java, Sumatra and Malacca. Countless other crimes and misdemeanours accompanied the growth of the modern economy in other parts of the planet.

God Save The King, Sonnet (New UK Anthem) God save our gracious King, Long live our noble King! Even if he is a philanderer, God save our righteous King! Send him victorious, happy and glorious, ruler of the free world, even if he is ignominious! Thy choicest gifts in store, on him be pleased to pour, let starving natives starve, so our king may rightly soar. May he defend our laws, and ever give us cause, to be but proud morons, merrying over massacres.

Humpty Dumpty (Colonial Sonnet) Humpty Dumpty sat on a throne, he made a career of divide-n-rule. Whole west found a savior in a fool, as he was anointed the royal mule. He smuggled food from starving natives, for fighting troops were far more worthy. Adolf was designated the villain supremo, while he was the free world's beloved Humpty. It's fault of the natives to "breed like rabbits", he was right to be their judge and executioner. After all, human rights mean rights of the pale, freedom and equality don't apply to the darker. Humpty Dumpty was ready with his cigar, to fight the invaders on the beaches. Sure he was the right nut for the job, expertise lies in centuries of practice.

The Bengal famine has been the final epitaph of British rule and achievement in India.” Churchill stubbornly refused concessions to nationalist sentiment, dismissing objections from the Americans and their Chinese clients. Leo Amery recoiled in dismay from Churchill’s ravings:

Thank You Hitler (The Sonnet) Thank you Hitler for showing the worst of humanity, I am sorry that we couldn't place you on a pedestal. Things would've been different if you were not a nobody, Particularly if you had a background royally honorable. Apparently if you have an empire to your name, You can get away with the most heinous of atrocities. If you have that blue blood running through your veins, Tyranny, oppression, are deemed as acts of great dignity. The common notion is, everything nazi is sick and sinister, At the same time, everything british is great and glorious, Despite the fact that it was the british empire that was, An international force of evil unlike the nazi bastards. Nazism is an enemy of humanity, there is no doubt. Only if we felt so for the empire as we do for the krauts!

Famine in Bengal added to already growing resentment of British rule.

Hitler's holocaust took over 6 million lives, hence he is rightly deemed a monster, but the british empire uprooted 15 million people from their homes, massacred millions and starved four million people to death. What about that?

ঐতিহাসিক ও সমাজতাত্ত্বিকরা স্বাধীনতা-উত্তর পশ্চিম বাংলার সমস্যার প্রধানত যে ধরনের বিশ্লেষণ করেছেন, যা পরে পড়েছি, তা একটি বিরাট অপূর্ণতার শিকার। পঞ্জাবের সঙ্গে তুলনা করে বলা হয়েছে, ওরা কেমন নিজেদের উদ্যোগে ঝটপট দেশভাগের সমস্যা পেরিয়ে সুখী-সমৃদ্ধ জীবনে উঠে আসতে পেরেছে, বাঙালিরা পারেনি কারণ তারা উদ্যমহীন, পরের ঘাড়ে দায়িত্ব চাপাতে তাদের জুড়ি নেই। এই স্বভাবনিন্দুকরা সময়ের পটভুমিকাটুকু ভুলে থাকতে চান। দুর্ভিক্ষ ও যুদ্ধজনিত সামাজিক-আর্থিক চাপ বাঙালি অস্তিত্বকে, সেই সঙ্গে অস্তিত্বচেতনাকেও নড়বড়ে করে দিয়েছিল, যে সংকট পঞ্জাবকে ছুঁতে পারেনি। উদ্বাস্তুদের জন্য পঞ্জাবে কেন্দ্রীয় সরকার থেকে যে-পরিমাণ সহায়তার ব্যবস্থা করা হয়েছিল, তার সিকি পরিমাণও বাঙালি শরনার্থীদের ভাগ্যে জোটেনি। মহাযুদ্ধ থেকে পঞ্জাবের আখেরে লাভই হয়েছেঃ ফৌজে-যোগ-দেওয়া পঞ্জাবকুল তাঁদের বিত্তের সম্ভার বাড়াতে পেরেছিলেন, বাঙালিরা যা আদৌ পারেননি।

White Fragility Sonnet (A Record of White Crimes Against Humanity) Whiteness has done more harm to the world than good, Till you look past your whiteness, you cannot be human. Orange 'n musky trash of white privilege diss diversity, What else would you expect from colonial descendants! Every generation has its fraudsters like Edison, Every generation has trashy maniacs like Columbus. Every generation has war-merchants like Kissinger, Every generation has its churchillian doofus. White people tortured the Africans, White people booted Native Americans; White people massacred the Vietnamese, White people lynched and looted the Indians. White people caused genocide after genocide, Yet you still boast about white superiority. You proclaim that people of color are inferior, While white society is the epitome of savagery. If devil had a color, it would be white - Yet I say, color is nonsense, we're all equal. I am human enough to give you place beside me, All I expect is that, a human behaves human. After all the heartaches inflicted by white people, A 100 generations worth apology won't be sufficient. Yet I am human enough to declare, we are all equal; All I ask is that, humans finally behave human. They say, I'm spreading hate against the whites; To which I say, human making is my mission. There is no hope for humanitarian uplift, Unless you renounce all fragile intoleration. If you wanna learn about tolerance, ask a person of color, How do you even tolerate the sight of white people, when the wrongs done to you by whites are unparalleled in history! You'll realize, there's no mythical secret to integration, For ages we've known no other life but of inclusivity. Middle East, India and Far East, have been the melting pot of integration, before the whites even knew what integration is. Yet you say white people are superior - so be it; Cowards always take refuge in fairytales, to justify their fragility and prejudice. If you wanna be a decent human being, Never draw moral parameters from the west. No matter whether you're born of east or west, Remember, you are human first, then all else. To recognize diversity is science, To celebrate diversity is humanity. To recognize privilege is common sense, To abandon privilege builds human society.

Who was really to blame for the Bengal famine? Probably the truth is discoverable, but the facts will be so dishonestly set forth in almost any newspaper that the ordinary reader can be forgiven either for swallowing lies or failing to form an opinion. The general uncertainty as to what is really happening makes it easier to cling to lunatic beliefs.

The evil that let three million people starve in the Bengal Famine wasn’t that different from the evil that was with us still. It was the same evil that had led those soldiers to lie about the people they had murdered in Khataba. That evil was the inability to recognize the humanity in experiences that were not your own, in experiences that seemed alien. So, in a way, Kaval had been right. She’d asked me why it mattered what Churchill had done almost a century ago. By itself, it didn’t. Whether Churchill was a hero or a monster was not a problem we really needed to face. The problem we had to face was that the story that allowed Churchill to be monstrous—the colonial mind-set, the mind-set of supremacy based on race and nationality—was still alive. This was not about Churchill the man. This was about Churchill the legacy.

In 1943 Bengal suffered one of the world’s worst famines: some 3 million people died due to British wartime requisitioning policies, diverting resources away from Bengal’s crisis and laying bare the hollowness of Britain’s claim to be running an efficient and benevolent empire. As commentators on all sides of the political divide suggested, events in Southeast Asia suggested Britain’s political and moral weaknesses.

As so often Churchill did himself no good by ill-advised comments about the ‘starvation of anyhow underfed Bengalis’ being ‘less serious than that of sturdy Greeks’, or about Indians ‘breeding like rabbits’ and getting paid a million pounds a day for ‘doing nothing about the war’. These remarks, disgraceful in their own time and even more offensive in today’s judgement, have been the basis of a myth, but it is no more than a myth that Churchill altered decisions which were ultimately based on strategic priorities.

in 1770–71, at the height of the Bengal famine, an astounding £1,086,255 was transferred to London by Company executives – perhaps £100 million in modern currency.27

We have outdone the Spaniards in Peru! They were at least butchers on a religious principle, however diabolical their zeal. We have murdered, deposed, plundered, usurped – say what think you of the famine in Bengal, in which three millions perished, being caused by a monopoly of the provisions by the servants of the East India Company?

Yet, like more recent mega-corporations, the EIC proved at once hugely powerful and oddly vulnerable to economic uncertainty. Only seven years after the granting of the Diwani, when the Company’s share price had doubled overnight after it acquired the wealth of the treasury of Bengal, the East India bubble burst after plunder and famine in Bengal led to massive shortfalls in expected land revenues. The EIC was left with debts of £1.5 million and a bill of £1 million* in unpaid tax owed to the Crown. When knowledge of this became public, thirty banks collapsed like dominoes across Europe, bringing trade to a standstill.

Yet, like more recent mega-corporations, the EIC proved at once hugely powerful and oddly vulnerable to economic uncertainty. Only seven years after the granting of the Diwani, when the Company’s share price had doubled overnight after it acquired the wealth of the treasury of Bengal, the East India bubble burst after plunder and famine in Bengal led to massive shortfalls in expected land revenues.

In contrast to the rigidity and dogmatism of British land-and-revenue settlements, both the Moguls and Marathas flexibly tailored their rule to take account of the crucial ecological relationships and unpredictable climate fluctuations of the subcontinent's drought-prone regions. The Moguls had "laws of leather," wrote journalist Vaughan Nash during the famine of 1899, in contrast to the British "laws of iron." Moreover, traditional Indian elites, like the great Bengali zamindars, seldom shared Utilitarian obsessions with welfare cheating and labor discipline. "Requiring the poor to work for relief, a practice begun in 1866 in Bengal under the influence of the Victorian Poor Law, was in flat contradiction to the Bengali premise that food should be given ungrudgingly, as a father gives food to his children." Although the British insisted that they had rescued India from "timeless hunger," more than one official was jolted when Indian nationalists quoted from an 1878 study published in the prestigious Journal of the Statistical Society that contrasted thirty-one serious famines in 120 years of British rule against only seventeen recorded famines in the entire previous two millennia. India and China, in other words, did not enter modern history as the helpless "lands of famine" so universally enshrined in the Western imagination. Certainly the intensity of the ENSO cycle in the late nineteenth century, perhaps only equaled on three or four other occasions in the last century, perhaps only equaled on three or four other occasions in the last millennium, most loom large in any explanation of the catastrophes of the 1870s and 1890s. But it is scarcely the only independent variable. Equal causal weight, or more, must be accorded to the growing social vulnerability to climate variability that became so evident in south Asia, north China, northeast Brazil and southern Africa in late Victorian times. As Michael Watts has eloquently argued in his history of the "silent violence" of drought-famine in colonial Nigeria: "Climate risk...is not given by nature but...by 'negotiated settlement' since each society has institutional, social, and technical means for coping with risk... Famines [thus] are social crises that represent the failures of particular economic and political systems