3 - Democracies and Famines
from Part I - Introduction and Background
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 August 2016
Summary
Democracies and Famines
Sen argues that “there has never been a famine in a functioning multiparty democracy” (Sen 1999, 178). In democracies, he argues, a free press can alert citizens, governments, and outsiders to famine conditions; opposition politicians can criticize the government; and citizens can vote governments out of office if they do nothing to avert the famine or feed those who face starvation. These same groups can criticize the government's impending or implemented social policies if they are likely to result in famine (Sen 1999, 178–86). “Transparency freedom” (Sen 1999, 185) lets citizens and the opposition know what the government is doing before it is too late to remedy its policies. Sen particularly mentions that “the positive role of political and civil rights applies to the prevention of economic and social disasters in general” (Sen 1999, 184), an argument I also make throughout this volume. In all four cases discussed in Part II, governments denied the right to vote, media freedom, and other civil and political rights to the people who became victims of famine and malnutrition.
Other studies also mention the relationship between violations of civil and political rights and famine. Article 19, a non-governmental organization named for Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, focuses on freedom of opinion and expression. It reported on the connection between famine and censorship as early as 1990. Using studies of China's Great Leap Forward (authored by an anonymous scholar of China), and famine in Ethiopia and Sudan in the 1980s (authored by Alex de Waal), Article 19 showed that, as Sen later argued, “censorship [is] a cause of famine” (D'Souza 1990, 3): Citizens lacking the right and capacity to protest against government policies endured faminogenesis.
Ó Gráda proposes other advantages of democracy that lessen the likelihood of famine. He argues that “Effective and compassionate governance might lead to competitive [food] markets, sanctions against corruption, and well-directed relief” (Ó Gráda 2009, 13). As Part II shows, competitive market economies were prohibited in North Korea and undermined in Zimbabwe and Venezuela. “Well-directed relief” suggests not only national governments’ responsibilities to provide relief to the starving and malnourished but also their obligation to accept foreign food aid and distribute it equitably.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- State Food Crimes , pp. 40 - 58Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2016