• mr_anny
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    7 days ago

    Whatever the reason, it was a famine, a wide spread scarcity of food.

    Look the definition up.

    • Kobibi@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 days ago

      I mean it was a famine but only because of an overreliance on one specific crop, due to sociopolitical reasons

      Normally if one crop fails due to a disease, it won’t result in a full-scale famine. Most historical famines are caused by wider climate and weather patterns

      So to call it a famine is a little disingenuous, even if its technically accurate

        • Kobibi@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 days ago

          Yeah that’s fair. Perhaps my objection is really that the word ‘famine’ spanning both environmental and man-made food shortages can blur the issue generally.

          Like, aside from a few relatively brief famines exacerbated by war, the Irish Famine is pretty much the first ‘artifical’ famine historically. It’s not until the 20th Century that these become common

          So you’re right, but the term ‘famine’ definitely gets used to imply something natural and unavoidable, particularly in the 19th Century

          • mr_anny
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 days ago

            Yes. People tend to use it as if it was some natural or biblical born disaster.

            But no.

            Famine is descriptive word for outcome of mechanics in play to produce scarcity of food.

            It literally means hunger.