Can one, for example, total up the deaths of the Opium War? It was a war fought entirely over whether Britain ought to be able to sell opium to the Chinese. The Chinese government didn’t want that, but the Chinese people were happy to buy opium.
It was, in effect, a war for free trade.
What about all the colonial wars, and all the colonial famines and massacres? Oh, this is an old argument, “Is imperialism part of capitalism?”
It was certainly understood that way by many actual imperialists, and it was certainly run that way. Before Britain conquered India, India had more manufacturing capacity than Britain. The British, however, wanted Indians as customers, not competitors, and made sure to shut most of that down.
And there were certainly a lot of famines in India under the British. Is it fair to attribute those to capitalism? If it isn’t, why not? A large number of the deaths in the original Black Book are deaths due to famine.
Europeans conquered other nations to obtain control over resources and markets, and they weren’t shy in saying this was the case. Cotton flooded in from colonial North America, sugar from the Carribean, fur from the northern North America, ruled, in effect, by the Hudson’s Bay Company for centuries just as India was ruled by the East India company.
Если коммунистические режимы преступны, за что надо каяться и люстрировать, то капиталистические режимы тоже виновны и к ним стоит применять все тоже самое, что хотят от коммунистов. Каждый доктор Ебург виновен в голодоморе ирландцев, истреблении индейцев и опиумных войнах. Не говоря о трансантлантической работорговле и нацизме.