ME 273 Lecture Notes - Lecture 30: Stanley Wolpert, Food Security, Overgrazing
2 May 2018
School
Department
Course
Professor
Mahmood 1
Roots of Poverty
Q. Answering question 2
In order to analyse whether poverty is a modern phenomenon in post-colonial
societies, we need to go back to the state of pre-colonial societies. This analysis thus is going
to look into that with an example of the conditions that existed before, and at the time of
British rule in India with a reference to the reading The Late Victorian Holocaust by Davis
Mike, and also the colonial roots of famine in Karamoja.
The British rule in India according to Davis can be summarised into a single fact as to
how India’s per capita income went stagnant from 1757 to 1947. Furthermore, in the age of
Kipling, usually attributed as the “glorious imperial half century”, the life expectancy of
Indians actually fell by around 20 percent (311-312). British rule along with new social
relations of production can be seen as the main perpetuator of this poverty, and not only that,
it also rather changed its very etiology. British rule altered the relations of production in a
way so that now they were in link with larger socio-economic structures. Some major ways in
which this affected the colony were highlighted as follows (Davis 288).
Firstly, smallholder productions were forcibly incorporated into commodity and
financial circuits primarily controlled from the overseas. What this led to was a turn towards
cash-crop cultivation, and that in turn undermined the traditional food security. Second,
tropic cultivators in the millions were now at a disadvantage as the produce of temperate
regions was favoured over tropical regions. Some of which was due to ocean freight rates,
transportation costs, and productivity, including various other reasons. Thirdly, imperialism
confiscated the local autonomy and delayed state-level developmental responses – such as the
investments in water preservation and irrigation which would’ve helped against climate
shocks and agriculture. Along with that, tariffs were not decided in London rather than in
India based on England’s interest (Davis 289-290). One example of that is pointed out by
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
Mahmood 2
Stanley Wolpert is of how Viceroy Lytton actually overruled the entire council’s decision by
removing all import duties on British-made cotton despite the widespread famine of
Maharashtra and India’s desperate times in the year 1879 (Davis, 313-314). Marcello de
Cecco argued how British rulers deliberately prevented the Indians to become skilled
mechanics, and also refused contracts from Indian firms that produced materials that were
available in England. Contrastingly, thanks to various government policies, government
purchases in India were forced to go towards British imports that at times were increasingly
non-competitive, and obsolete (Davis, 298).
In addition to having policies that went against their interest in terms of free-trade,
Indian economy was also suppressed by military expenditures, and the Gold Standard. India
was forced to devote huge portions of its national income to war. India was already caught in
a huge debt that included repaying the stockholders of the East India company, and paying
the cost of the revolt in 1857, but furthermore, it also had to fiancé British military
supremacy in Asia. Davis points out how “…ordinary Indians paid for far-flung adventures
of the Indian army such as the sacking of Beijing (1860), the invasion of Ethiopia (1868), the
occupation of Egypt (1992), and the conquest of Sudan (1896-98)” (302). As a result, no less
than 25 percent of the Indian’s national economy was funding military expenditures, and
even then viceroys were still in search to increase that amount, at times by even getting them
directly from the Famine funds (Davis 302).
The Gold Standard on the other hand made the situation far worse, one-quarter of the
purchasing power of the common people was stolen due to the Gold Standard as the savings
of common people constituted mainly of silver ornaments. According to Sir William
Wodderburn, Indian peasants normally had three safeguards against famine, domestic hoards
of grain, family ornaments, and credit with the village moneylenders. All three of which were
taken from them by the end of the nineteenth century (Davis 303-304).
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
Document Summary
In order to analyse whether poverty is a modern phenomenon in post-colonial societies, we need to go back to the state of pre-colonial societies. This analysis thus is going to look into that with an example of the conditions that existed before, and at the time of. British rule in india with a reference to the reading the late victorian holocaust by davis. Mike, and also the colonial roots of famine in karamoja. The british rule in india according to davis can be summarised into a single fact as to how india"s per capita income went stagnant from 1757 to 1947. Kipling, usually attributed as the glorious imperial half century , the life expectancy of. Indians actually fell by around 20 percent (311-312). British rule along with new social relations of production can be seen as the main perpetuator of this poverty, and not only that, it also rather changed its very etiology.
