: Yes, and that's part of teh problem with his methodology; he doesn't accept that an impersonaal system can be responsible fro lot of misery, which naturaally stacks the death in his favor. Also, he doesn't count the victims of private crimes and murder worldwide. Why not?Because he studied *governments*. If he included 'private' crimes then he would be processing a billion individuals rather than governments. Blaming america for the mugger on 42nd street is tenuous and problematic at best!
: No. I'm saying that if you have a storehouse of food and you distribute it to people according to some system you have,
*you* dont. Its done by the interactions of millions of people and organisations of people, hence how would one go about blaming america?
: Those famines were 'planned' by teh state only inasmuch as the state said, 'we are going to restructure the means of production, and if people must die, that's OK". It was callous indefference to human life that caused the death.
And you can link it to govt, you cant line the American example in any meaningful way to govt. Its difficult to link the starvation of several people in Queens to policy XYZ by the govt.
: No, but neither you nor I are the ones who decdie how food is to be distributed, therefore we bear less blame.
But the question 'why arent we?' is worth asking.
: No, but I proposed Kerala, Sweden, Nicaragua, and other stataes as good examples. I can live with their flaws, I don't try to evade them.
And some people could not live with the flaws - we worry over minorities in the US and in HK, but not in Kerala?
