Was The British Government Responsible For The Great Bengal Famine of 1943? | Live Debate
Vložit
- čas přidán 6. 09. 2024
- SPEAKERS:
Amb. Kishan S Rana
Ambassador Kishan S. Rana is Professor Emeritus, and a Senior Fellow at DiploFoundation. He was Ambassador and High Commissioner for Algeria, Czechoslovakia, Kenya, Mauritius, and Germany; and consul general in San Francisco. He served on staff of PM Indira Gandhi (1981-82).
Author of the forthcoming book - Churchill, and India: Manipulation Or Betrayal?
Dr. Sanjoy Bhattacharya
'Sanjoy Bhattacharya is a historian of South Asia in 19th and 20th centuries, and also works on national, international and global health policy analysis. He is current Head of the School of History at the University of Leeds, UK, where he holds the additional role of Professor of Medical and Global Health Histories.'
Dr Madhusree Mukherjee
Madhusree Mukerjee is a writer and journalist. She is the author of The Land of Naked People: Encounters with Stone Age Islanders (2003) and Churchill's Secret War: The British Empire and the Ravaging of India during World War II (2010). She is also a contributor to the People's Archive of Rural India and an editor with Scientific American.She documents the role played by the policies, as well as the racial and political worldview, of the war-time Prime Minister Winston Churchill and his trusted friend and advisor Frederick Lindemann, in the death and devastation caused by the Bengal famine of 1943 and the partition of India.
Dr. Mark Tauger
Mark B. Tauger is Associate Professor of History at West Virginia University, USA. In 2016-2017 he was a Fellow at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, New Jersey. He has published on agriculture and famines and has won the Eric Wolf Prize of the Journal of Peasant History and the Wayne D. Rasmussen Award of the Agricultural History Society. He is the author of "Agriculture in World History"
Dr. Tirathankar Roy
Professor of Economic History at Department of Economic History, at the LSE, and the author of India in the World Economy from Antiquity to the Present. He is one of the most influential researchers of the Economic History of South Asia and India, having published over 25 books and numerous articles. His work spans the fields of Economic History, Business History and Social History, particularly studying the effects of British colonialism in India on its economic development. His recent publications include Law and the Economy in Colonial India. The book discusses the diverse influences that shaped British Indian law and shows why it delivered rather poor value to the users.
FURTHER READINGS:
1. penguin.co.in/... - By Madhusree Mukherjee
2. www.nybooks.co... - By Dr. Mark Tauger
3. books.google.c... - By Dr. Tirathankar Roy
4. books.google.c... - By Amb. Kishan S Rana
EXPLORE MORE:
Find out about upcoming sessions and learn how you can join them live and become a part of the conversation - www.argumentat...
DISCLAIMER:
We invite thought leaders from across the ideological spectrum. The guests in our sessions express their independent views and opinions. Argumentative Indians does not profess to subscribe, agree or endorse the same or be in anyway responsible for the stance, words and comments of our guests.
![Would We Be Better Off Without Religion? - Christopher Hitchens [2007] ✝️ | Intelligence Squared](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/DIR7_X-ahy4/mqdefault.jpg)
I knew very little about the Bengal famine. Never knew it was of such grave magnitude
This effort is appreciable
As a Bengali, whose ancestors hail from Comilla & Dhaka, who endured that intentional British - made famine that killed millions of poor, rural Bengalis, I must thank the channel for making the effort to discuss this topic with such an illustrious panel. My father was a young student of St Gregory's High School, Dhaka and he was witness to a hellish landscape of dying & dead corpses, strewn around the river banks, every day while going to school. He told me that he could never forget the faces of the starving mothers, who barely had the energy left to beg for food for their starving babies, who didn't have any energy to cry. Their eyes is what he remembered most - holding him guilty. Was he a 11 year old boy guilty for their deaths? He certainly never forgave himself for not being able to do much during that time. Clearly, he had far higher moral standards than the British government.
I fully agree with you.Dr.Madhusree Mukherjee has brought out for the first time the responsibility of the British Government in general and of Churchill in particular.She , I know, is from Jadavpur University.I congratulate her .Bravo! Please go on doing this kind of patriotic work. I bought your book the first time it
was published.A Swedish lady told me in 2004 in Gothenburg that she worked on her Ph.D thesis about the Bengal genocide of 1943.
Those public who agree with Mukherjee either he is lier or mad. Mukherjee is neither a economist nor a historian. He propoganda against Churchill already broken by historian Dr Zareer Masani, Arthur L Herman, Richard M Langworth, Andrew Roberts. But she is completely lier rascal. She is repeating same lie.
How do you explain that there has never been any famines in independent India? How do you explain that there were hardly any famines in India in the 1000 years before the British?
Yajur Arora, in answer to your question were Germans held accountable for killing their own people, Germans, Ukrainians and Poles who found themselves in the Einsatzgruppen or other units who killed their own people and others were prosecuted. Not every one, some escaped, but largely yes, a serious attempt was and has been attempted to bring to book those who took part in this. Further, you make the point that India has not had the problem of people starving since independence. That's not my memory of events - India has suffered from famines that brought loss of life, particularly in the 1970s.
Pretty conclusive then, largely Britain's fault and a wonderfully impartial moderator. The offer by the United States to give grain to India scuppered not because of British reluctance to allow them to poke their bugle in, but more on the grounds that the Bay of Bengal was rife with Japanese submarines. A moderator who is particularly forgiving of his fellow country men who shot their own people.
Brilliant Discussion. Very enlightening!
Just fabulous discussion and Dr Sanjoy and Dr Madhusree makes the best case. Great going Yajur.
It is very strange how T.Roy got his PhD from JNU and became a professor in the LSE. His knowledge of history is very limited and very pro-British.
I must add however that the retired ambassador did not bring anything of substance to the table. The topic would have been covered even better with the remaining four participants. Arguments, disagreements are integral part of any academic discourse. "How dare you?" cannot be part of that, however much unacceptable the opponent's view may be.
Sir, I’m sorry but I disagree with you about this. As a biographer of Churchill, Amb. Rana brought several valuable insights on his attitude towards India. I was not aware of this side of Churchill. The "How dare you?" might have been a bit hyperbolic, but it did seem to have jolted Dr Tauger into realising that his arguments came across as defending the "indefensible", and Dr Tauger subsequently made an effort to clarify his position. On the other had it had no effect of Dr Roy, who remained steadfast on his position without offering any solid argument to support it or to counter the others.
My thanks to Ashok755. I am willing to learn, but do please consider the following: 1. My book 'Churchill and India: Manipulation or Betrayal?' was the trigger that led to this discussion. Pl try and read the evidence I have cited on Churchill's role in the Great Indian Famine of 1942-43. 2. Time did not permit raising three points with which that book ends: Why did India not carry out a real inquiry after 1947 into the Faminer? Why is there no memorial to the victims of that needless tragedy? Why is the Famine excluded from many historical studies, and seldom included in the Indian school curriculum? Thanks and regards, Kishan
T.Roy is trying to distort the picture to shift the blame on the provincial government of Bengal, which during the war was subservient to the Central Government and ultimately to the British War Council. T.Roy behaved like a pure slave of the British. Mahushree Mukherjee asked, what T.Roy is smoking. That is the most important comments for people like T.Roy and Tauger. During the war there was a strict censorship. Any criticism by anyone would invite imprisonment. Election of India during the British was restricted to only 16 percent of the rich people of India. Was that democratic? T.Roy is Sepoy.
This man, Churchill, EVIL .
A scholarly study found that British colonialism resulted in approximately 165 million deaths in India from 1880 to 1920 while stealing at least $45 trillion in wealth from the country. Tens of millions more Indians died in human-made famines that were caused by the British Empire. The impact of British colonial policies during this period was devastating, with excess deaths far surpassing those caused by famines in the Soviet Union, Maoist China, and North Korea combined. This tragic chapter in history underscores the immense human cost of empire-building and exploitation.
Imports from Burma used to be about 2-5 percent of the rice supply of Bengal. Imports from Burma was stopped by Japan, but if imports from other parts of India were allowed there could not be any famine. There were imports from other parts of India to Calcutta port, but these all went straight for exports to Europe and for the army, not for the people of Bengal. All food stocks were confiscated by the British and British agents like Suhrawardy who gave the contract to buy food grain to his friend Isphahani, a Muslim businessman. All boats were confiscated. Japan offered 100,000 tons of rice from Burma but that was rejected.
Japan was not responsible at all, British PM Churchill was responsible. He rejected the offer of help from the USA and Australia.
This was a great talk. This needs to be widely watched!
Mark Tauger is just disgusting. He merely followed the paper written by Padmanvan, who was in the Agricultural Research Station in Chinsurah, West Bengal, I am a native of that place. The Minister of Agriculture Naren De in 1980 and 90s was known to me. I went to that research station and talked the Director and other scientists of that research station , which is now a part of the BC Roy Agricultural University . Padvanavan was talking about an experiement that went on in that research station in 1943, to produce high quality of rice that normally grow in Punjab in the soil condition of Bengal with the injection of huge quantity of chemical fertilizers. That experient failed. Padvanavan put the blame on a pest that became more intense due to a cyclone in early 1943. Tauger has not looked at the tables put forward by Padvanavan, where he himself mentioned that the seeds of the common variety of rice was not affected but only the Punjab variety of rice were affected. That proved that Tauger cannot arrtribute the cause of the famine on the pest. He should read more carefully the paper of Padvanavan, particularly the Table 1.
Japan offered 100,000 Tons of rice from Burma but the British Government refused to accept that. Wavell was appointed when the famine was almost over. He took whatever action was possible.
Good debate
1.Wealthy Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy was in charge of food distribution in Bengal. He was given large amounts of food and money to give to the poor in Bengal so they had enough food. Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy stole the money and sold the food at an inflated price thus making himself and his friends even more money.
2.The Japanese were 100% to blame for food shortages and food inflation in Bengal.
3.Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy was 100% to blame for the amount of people who died.
Conclusion...Nice attempt to use Anglophobia to cover up for the wealthy and very powerful Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy, but it does not fit the facts.
Here Chowkidaar h chor aur jamakhori aur apradhi hain
After listening to all arguments the conclusion is this was a man made famine ,starting at the very top with the british prime minister to blame .Obscene amonts of foodgrain stocks were accumulated and held in reserve for Europeans to be sold off at a profit after the war,Indian famine affected people were the last thing on Churchill 's mind,further establishing that india and indians were to be enjoyed by colonial powers only, Extract, extract, extract was the only mantra of Churchill under guise of war effort
@@pushpenderrana6190 There was no shortage of food in India as a whole. There was hoarding and a refusal to use the famine codes, all this was done by the "Muslim Legaue" who made a profit from this tragic Bengal famine. Unfashionable facts.
@@jacobfield4848 At the end of the day if there was no shortage of food and the muslim league was responsible then what was the british administration doing .they could have raided the godowns where grain was hoarded .
They had rules, the Muslim League were supposed to call in the Famine Codes. The British ruled through local people, not from London.@@pushpenderrana6190
Inter-regional trade: Just in response to the question raised by Dr. Roy about inter-regional trade - besides the point already mentioned, about Congress governments from a few neighbouring states had already resigned and did not have powers to send aid there was also an inter-provincial trade ban in place which prevented aid from reaching Bengal. This inter provincial trade ban was to prevent shortages for the military. Excess food was especially prevented from reaching Bengal due to the scorched earth policy in place (preventing excess food from falling into Japanese hands).
Excellent discussion. Disappointed by Dr. Roy and Dr. Tauger who knowingly side step important issues.
The provincial governments had the power to ban private sales of food from their province to other provinces. It wasn’t a ban imposed by the central government.
They had this power so they could stop famine prices spreading to their province; the provincial government could then carefully purchase any surplus grain and send it to the province suffering from a famine.
My observations after listening to the whole discussion -
1. The moderator needs to let the speakers make their point. Why the constant urge to intervene? Further, dress up to complement the gravity of the conversation and presence of such learned folks? The presentation here smacked of lethargy.
2. The British have blood on their hands. Yet, no one seems to address the topic of remorse by them. Why the fear to address it? Stonewalling is the last thing I would expect from you folks.
3. Dr Tauger should have come out at the outset and condemned the British actions. He chose not to. I wonder why.
Finally, AI - intriguing and good choice of topic and panelists. However, your moderator wasn't either prepared well enough or chose not to address what should have been done thoroughly. Have certainly seen much better content from you folks.
Thanks for your comments. May I explain? 1. Was it essential to wear a tie to address a serious issue? Surely this is a matter of choice, but I don't think anyone's attire was inappropriate. 2. Far from stonewalling, the panel as a whole was critical of the British role, esp. of Churchill. 3. I truly think the moderator did a good job. Remember, it is a thankless task, to keep speakers on track and to manage the available time.
I hope this discussion opens the door to a simple fact -- Independent India has done little to respect the memory of the Great Famine of 1942-43. Some historians too have ignored this major event.
These are some points that need to be considered. Kishan S Rana
Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy and the Japanese are 100% to blame. Anglophobia is not history.
@@jacobfield4848 Imports from Burma used to be about 2-5 percent of the rice supply of Bengal. Imports from Burma was stopped by Japan, but if imports from other parts of India were allowed there could not be any famine. There were imports from other parts of India to Calcutta port, but these all went straight for exports to Europe and for the army, not for the people of Bengal. All food stocks were confiscated by the British and British agents like Suhrawardy who gave the contract to buy food grain to his friend Isphahani, a Muslim businessman. All boats were confiscated. Japan offered 100,000 tons of rice from Burma but that was rejected.
Japan was not responsible at all, British PM Churchill was responsible. He rejected the offer of help from the USA and Australia.
@@DipakBose-bq1vv Imports from Burma were 15% of what Bengal needed, and this created massive inflation in food prices. Food from across India was brought to Bengal, some was stolen from trains, but most was hoarded by those in charge of the distribution, whuich was the Muslim league. The head of the Muslim League also stole money given to them to buy food from across India and distribute the food. The Mulsim Legaue also refused to allow the Famine code to be used and stated there was no food shortage. No poor people died in the tragic Bengal famine, there was plenty of food it was just too expensive for the poor to buy.
The USA refused to help and the Japanese blocked exports to Bengal this caused the inflation. There was penty of food and The Muslim League hoarded the food.@@DipakBose-bq1vv