Death, the one thing Government excels at.

[Old Ducker]

The hall of fame, courtesy of R.J. Rummel via Lila Rajiva at www.mindbodypolitic.com:

“This is a report of the statistical results from a project on comparative genocide and mass-murder in this century. Most probably near 170,000,000 people have been murdered in cold-blood by governments, well over three-quarters by absolutist regimes. The most such killing was done by the Soviet Union (near 62,000,000 people), the communist government of China is second (near 35,000,000), followed by Nazi Germany (almost 21,000,000), and Nationalist China (some 10,000,000). Lesser megamurderers include WWII Japan, Khmer Rouge Cambodia, WWI Turkey, communist Vietnam, post-WWII Poland, Pakistan, and communist Yugoslavia. The most intense democide was carried out by the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia, where they killed over 30 percent of their subjects in less than four years. The best predictor of this killing is regime power. The more arbitrary power a regime has, the less democratic it is, the more likely it will kill its subjects or foreigners. The conclusion is that power kills, absolute power kills absolutely.“

http://mindbodypolitic.com/2009/12/10/government-democide-the-power-that-kills/

My comment: Authoritarian regimes tend to prefer their killing up close and personal. This especially applied to Japan. "Democratic" countries aren't squeamish about killing, but prefer not to see the result, so their preferred methods are bombs, whether conventional, incendiary or and more recently, cruise missiles and drones.

[Naraku]

The hall of fame, courtesy of R.J. Rummel via Lila Rajiva at www.mindbodypolitic.com:

“This is a report of the statistical results from a project on comparative genocide and mass-murder in this century. Most probably near 170,000,000 people have been murdered in cold-blood by governments, well over three-quarters by absolutist regimes. The most such killing was done by the Soviet Union (near 62,000,000 people), the communist government of China is second (near 35,000,000), followed by Nazi Germany (almost 21,000,000), and Nationalist China (some 10,000,000). Lesser megamurderers include WWII Japan, Khmer Rouge Cambodia, WWI Turkey, communist Vietnam, post-WWII Poland, Pakistan, and communist Yugoslavia. The most intense democide was carried out by the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia, where they killed over 30 percent of their subjects in less than four years. The best predictor of this killing is regime power. The more arbitrary power a regime has, the less democratic it is, the more likely it will kill its subjects or foreigners. The conclusion is that power kills, absolute power kills absolutely.“

http://mindbodypolitic.com/2009/12/10/government-democide-the-power-that-kills/

My comment: Authoritarian regimes tend to prefer their killing up close and personal. This especially applied to Japan. "Democratic" countries aren't squeamish about killing, but prefer not to see the result, so their preferred methods are bombs, whether conventional, incendiary or and more recently, cruise missiles and drones.

I find such statistics tasteless and slanted. This is more propaganda than a serious critique of anything. It is complete nonsense to compare the famines in China and the Soviet Union to the very deliberate slaughtering of people in Nazi Germany.

[Mini-Me]

I find such statistics tasteless and slanted. This is more propaganda than a serious critique of anything. It is complete nonsense to compare the famines in China and the Soviet Union to the very deliberate slaughtering of people in Nazi Germany.

If the comparison is strictly about "murder," maybe you're right, but looking past that language, these statistics do make an extremely good point:
"The best predictor of this killing is regime power."
Even though famine deaths were not strictly "murder," they would not have occurred had those governments not had so much power.

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

I find such statistics tasteless and slanted. This is more propaganda than a serious critique of anything. It is complete nonsense to compare the famines in China and the Soviet Union to the very deliberate slaughtering of people in Nazi Germany.

Wow....just wow....

Do you know anything about the USSR collectivization? Gulogs? Purge? What about Mao purges in China?

The USSR and China were far worse than Nazi Germany in terms of sheer murder power.

Do you even know why the USSR had famines? For the same reason that China did?

I would just suggest you read into the history of each nation a bit more.

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

If the comparison is strictly about "murder," maybe you're right, but looking past that language, these statistics do make an extremely good point:
"The best predictor of this killing is regime power."
Even though famine deaths were not strictly "murder," they would not have occurred had those governments not had so much power.

They were murder. Read up on Collectivization in the USSR and China. If that's not murder I don't know what is.

[Naraku]

Do you know anything about the USSR collectivization? Gulogs? Purge? What about Mao purges in China?

Given your response I can guarantee I know far more about it than you. For instance, the vast majority of "murders" blamed on both governments are the result of famine. There is an environmental factors in both cases and so how much of the deaths from famine can be blamed on the government is disputable. Also saying it is because of the extent of control shows some ignorance at least as it concerns China.

China is not some centralized state as Western propaganda often claims and it wasn't under Mao. Also, Mao was as much a dictator as George Washington. To call him a dictator is laughably ignorant of Chinese history and Chinese politics.

So how much of the famine in China can be connected to national authorities as opposed to local authorities is disputable.

Of course, the Great Leap Forward was a contributing factor, but only a propagandist would claim it was deliberate. Personally, I think people are just looking for what they can to defame the Chinese government as it is a political enemy. Many also count the Cultural Revolution and act like it was some sort of purge.

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

Given your response I can guarantee I know far more about it than you. For instance, the vast majority of "murders" blamed on both governments are the result of famine. There is an environmental factors in both cases and so how much of the deaths from famine can be blamed on the government is disputable. Also saying it is because of the extent of control shows some ignorance at least as it concerns China.

China is not some centralized state as Western propaganda often claims and it wasn't under Mao. Also, Mao was as much a dictator as George Washington. To call him a dictator is laughably ignorant of Chinese history and Chinese politics.

So how much of the famine in China can be connected to national authorities as opposed to local authorities is disputable.

Of course, the Great Leap Forward was a contributing factor, but only a propagandist would claim it was deliberate. Personally, I think people are just looking for what they can to defame the Chinese government as it is a political enemy. Many also count the Cultural Revolution and act like it was some sort of purge.

Here's a quick response on USSR:

In the Soviet Union, collectivization was introduced by Stalin in the late 1920s as a way, according to the theories of communist leaders, to boost agricultural production through the organization of land and labor into large-scale collective farms (kolkhozy). At the same time, Soviet leaders argued that collectivization would free poor peasants from economic servitude under the kulaks. Stalin believed that the goals of collectivization could be achieved voluntarily, but when the new farms failed to attract the number of peasants hoped, the government blamed the oppression of the kulaks and resorted to forceful implementation of the plan, by murder and wholesale deportation of farmers to Siberia. Millions of unfortunates who remained died of starvation, and the centuries-old system of farming was destroyed in one of the most fertile regions in the world for farming, once called "the breadbasket of Europe." The immediate effect of forced collectivization was to reduce grain output and almost halve livestock, thus producing major famines in 1932 and 1933.

In 1932-1933, an estimated 3.1–7 million people, mainly in Ukraine, died from famine after Stalin forced the peasants into the collectives (this famine is known in Ukraine as Holodomor). Most modern historians believe that this famine was caused by the sudden disruption of production brought on by collective farming policies that were implemented by the government of the Soviet Union. Some believe that, due to unreasonably high government quotas, farmers often received far less for their labor than they did before collectivization, and some refused to work; others retaliated by destroying their crops.

Currently at work, so wiki will suffice as I can't go snoop through my litany of historical books.

Sources:
Richard Overy: Russia's War, 1997
Eric Hobsbawm: Age of Extremes, 1994

This alone accounted for more total deaths than all of Nazi Germany. We're not even factoring in the Military Purges, political dissident purges via Gulog, and all sorts of other atrocities. USSR is by far the worst of the worst. China isn't far behind.

As for Mao. He purged political dissidents just as much as Stalin. This accounts for untold millions of deaths. The Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution were both directly related to the famine and the deaths associated. I don't see how indiscriminate murder is better than discriminate murder. How is forced collectivization not murder? You mean to tell me, that they believed they could somehow work collectivization better than Stalin which killed millions? Is this not the recurring episode of everything we see today? Keynes, et al? THEY ARE DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE. My god.

"The first phase of collectivisation was not a great success and there was widespread famine in 1956, though the Party's propaganda machine announced progressively higher harvests. Moderates within the Party, including Zhou Enlai, argued for a reversal of collectivisation. The position of the moderates was strengthened by Khrushchev's 1956 Secret speech at the 20th Congress which uncovered Stalin's crimes and highlighted the failure of his agricultural policies including collectivisation in the USSR."

No, they are not responsible. It was just bad harvests...and horrible environmental conditions. :rolleyes: Right. A true famine was the potato famine in Ireland, or the dustbowl famines in rural Midwest.

Cultural Revolution:

Some of the most extreme violence took place in the southern province of Guangxi, where a Chinese journalist found a "disturbing picture of official compliance in the systematic killing and cannibalization of individuals in the name of political revolution and 'class struggle.'" Senior party historians acknowledge that "In a few places, it even happened that 'counterrevolutionaries' were beaten to death and in the most beastly fashion had their flesh and liver consumed [by their killers]." Not even the minor children of 'enemies of the people' were spared, as more than a few were tortured and bludgeoned to death, dismembered and some of their organs - hearts, livers, and genitals - eaten during 'human flesh banquets'. As a result of this frenzied killing and 'obligatory cannibalism', an estimated 100,000 people were killed in Guangxi alone.

Yeah, no death and purges there....

If I had to choose between China, USSR, and Nazi Germany, I would pick Nazi Germany. My chances of dying in Nazi Germany are far less than the other two, and as far as tyranny, I would argue USSR and China were more tyrannous than Germany.

PS: Collectivization is the forecful seizure of property from the productive farmers, redistributed to lower class persons who had no idea how to farm, and then told get to work or else. They didn't even reap the rewards from their work. As ironic as it is, Stalin actually killed the lowly peasants he gave the farms to because they were so inept. No, you think you can just throw people in who've never farmed before and act like that works?

[coyote_sprit]

If you steal someone's crops and they die of malnutrition it's not famine, it's murder. Just as if you threw someone into the middle of the ocean.

[Mini-Me]

If you steal someone's crops and they die of malnutrition it's not famine, it's murder. Just as if you threw someone into the middle of the ocean.

Hrm. Isn't the first one technically involuntary manslaughter, and the second probably voluntary manslaughter? ;) Either way though, it's a hell of a lot more than some coincidental famine.

[CCTelander]

Hrm. Isn't the first one technically involuntary manslaughter, and the second probably voluntary manslaughter? ;) Either way though, it's a hell of a lot more than some coincidental famine.

Not to mention the fact that virtually all famine that exists in the world today is caused, in some fashion, by government.

There's no reason why any person living on this planet should have to go hungry. Get the friggin' governments out of the way and I'd bet the whole hunger problem would cease to exist within 5-10 years. Maybe sooner.

[ramallamamama]

...A true famine was the potato famine in Ireland...

Murder by government also.

What Caused the Irish Potato Famine?
by Mark Thornton
http://mises.org/freemarket_detail.aspx?control=88

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

Murder by government also.

What Caused the Irish Potato Famine?
by Mark Thornton
http://mises.org/freemarket_detail.aspx?control=88

I stand corrected, thanks.

[CCTelander]

Starvation. Another fine achievment brought to you by your local government. :(

[nbhadja]

Given your response I can guarantee I know far more about it than you. For instance, the vast majority of "murders" blamed on both governments are the result of famine. There is an environmental factors in both cases and so how much of the deaths from famine can be blamed on the government is disputable. Also saying it is because of the extent of control shows some ignorance at least as it concerns China.

China is not some centralized state as Western propaganda often claims and it wasn't under Mao. Also, Mao was as much a dictator as George Washington. To call him a dictator is laughably ignorant of Chinese history and Chinese politics.

So how much of the famine in China can be connected to national authorities as opposed to local authorities is disputable.

Of course, the Great Leap Forward was a contributing factor, but only a propagandist would claim it was deliberate. Personally, I think people are just looking for what they can to defame the Chinese government as it is a political enemy. Many also count the Cultural Revolution and act like it was some sort of purge.

The famine was a result of the GOVERNMENT. THe government destroyed the free market, incorrectly allocated the resources to its citizens (only the free market can correctly allocate it), and the government's price control caused severe shortages in addition to the government itself stealing people's food.

[Naraku]

Here's a quick response on USSR:

In the Soviet Union, collectivization was introduced by Stalin in the late 1920s as a way, according to the theories of communist leaders, to boost agricultural production through the organization of land and labor into large-scale collective farms (kolkhozy). At the same time, Soviet leaders argued that collectivization would free poor peasants from economic servitude under the kulaks. Stalin believed that the goals of collectivization could be achieved voluntarily, but when the new farms failed to attract the number of peasants hoped, the government blamed the oppression of the kulaks and resorted to forceful implementation of the plan, by murder and wholesale deportation of farmers to Siberia. Millions of unfortunates who remained died of starvation, and the centuries-old system of farming was destroyed in one of the most fertile regions in the world for farming, once called "the breadbasket of Europe." The immediate effect of forced collectivization was to reduce grain output and almost halve livestock, thus producing major famines in 1932 and 1933.

In 1932-1933, an estimated 3.1–7 million people, mainly in Ukraine, died from famine after Stalin forced the peasants into the collectives (this famine is known in Ukraine as Holodomor). Most modern historians believe that this famine was caused by the sudden disruption of production brought on by collective farming policies that were implemented by the government of the Soviet Union. Some believe that, due to unreasonably high government quotas, farmers often received far less for their labor than they did before collectivization, and some refused to work; others retaliated by destroying their crops.

I have seen quite a bit to suggest the Holodomor was intentional, though I am not so quick to accept such a verdict as you are. That said other famines were not intended and it is a stretch to say they had anything to do with collective farming practices.


This alone accounted for more total deaths than all of Nazi Germany. We're not even factoring in the Military Purges, political dissident purges via Gulog, and all sorts of other atrocities. USSR is by far the worst of the worst. China isn't far behind.

That is pure garbage. Nazi Germany killed millions of Jews, millions of Poles, perhaps a million Romani, all in very deliberate ways. They sought to eradicate the 30 million Poles and the entire Jewish people. They had the same motives for Slavs. They started one of the most destructive wars in world history. Not even if the Holodomor was intentional would the body count size up to Nazi Germany's because just as many people were probably killed in the Holocaust. Far more were killed as a result of war.


As for Mao. He purged political dissidents just as much as Stalin. This accounts for untold millions of deaths.

More nonsense. There was nothing even approaching the Great Purge by Stalin.


I don't see how indiscriminate murder is better than discriminate murder.

Intent is always considered a crucial factor when talking about murder. Someone who sets out to kill people is considered in need of a greater penalty.


You mean to tell me, that they believed they could somehow work collectivization better than Stalin which killed millions?

Israel implemented collective farming and there was no great famine. Also I should note the causes of the Chinese famine were not as easily connected to collectivization. Ill-conceived ideas like the Great Sparrow campaign and implementation of flawed agricultural theories is what most directly caused the problem. In addition there was a shift from farming to industrialization. All at the same time China was struck with a series of natural catastrophes. Blaming it on collectivization is just ignorant. Even absent collectivization it is likely China would have suffered a great famine.

Of course, before you seek to blame this on an authoritarian system you should be aware that none of these policies were forced.


"The first phase of collectivisation was not a great success and there was widespread famine in 1956, though the Party's propaganda machine announced progressively higher harvests. Moderates within the Party, including Zhou Enlai, argued for a reversal of collectivisation. The position of the moderates was strengthened by Khrushchev's 1956 Secret speech at the 20th Congress which uncovered Stalin's crimes and highlighted the failure of his agricultural policies including collectivisation in the USSR."

No, they are not responsible. It was just bad harvests...and horrible environmental conditions. :rolleyes: Right. A true famine was the potato famine in Ireland, or the dustbowl famines in rural Midwest.

I did not say collectivization was not connected, only that claiming it was the cause is foolish and ignorant.


Cultural Revolution:

Some of the most extreme violence took place in the southern province of Guangxi, where a Chinese journalist found a "disturbing picture of official compliance in the systematic killing and cannibalization of individuals in the name of political revolution and 'class struggle.'" Senior party historians acknowledge that "In a few places, it even happened that 'counterrevolutionaries' were beaten to death and in the most beastly fashion had their flesh and liver consumed [by their killers]." Not even the minor children of 'enemies of the people' were spared, as more than a few were tortured and bludgeoned to death, dismembered and some of their organs - hearts, livers, and genitals - eaten during 'human flesh banquets'. As a result of this frenzied killing and 'obligatory cannibalism', an estimated 100,000 people were killed in Guangxi alone.

Yeah, no death and purges there....

Don't cite that garbage here. I have heard of this absurd myth of cannibalization during the Cultural Revolution and it is completely baseless. There are instances of cannibalization any time there is famine, but this is just absurd racist bile akin to claims of China serving "fetal soup" in restaurants.

The fact you so happily indulge in such falsehoods clearly indicates that you are far from informed on this matter.


If I had to choose between China, USSR, and Nazi Germany, I would pick Nazi Germany. My chances of dying in Nazi Germany are far less than the other two, and as far as tyranny, I would argue USSR and China were more tyrannous than Germany.

Germany had how many people? How many did China have? I would say your chances of dying in Nazi Germany were higher.