It is relevant insofar as it addresses the question of private property and its value as an institution, which is precisely what the chain of comments I replied to was discussing.

I'm not sure why you chose to take issue with my comment, but not those preceding comments.

> The Bengal Famine

Another illustrative example of a famine caused by State policies and lack of respect for people's private property: Japanese raids and destruction of merchant ships, government-ordered destruction of rice stocks, trade barriers, the "rice denial" and "boat denial" policies, refusal of imports, etc.

Not sure what you mean by "western" property rights. I'll assume you meant private property rights.

> turn out not to prevent famine at all

They do prevent famine. They don't prevent all famine. To conflate the two, as you have done here, is dishonest.

Certainly private property rights cannot prevent every natural disaster—that's not "strange" at all—but lack of respect for them can certainly amplify the effect of natural disasters.

For example, regarding the Great Irish Famine [0]:

After the defeat of James II in 1690 a series of “penal laws” were passed by the Irish Parliament, dominated by the Protestant minority who had supported William III. The first, in 1695, took away the right of Catholics to bear arms. Another forbade Catholics to go overseas for education and prohibited them from teaching or running schools within Ireland. The most important however was the Act to Prevent the Further Growth of Popery (1704). This prevented Catholics from buying land or inheriting it from Protestants, or from leasing land for more than 31 years. At about this time the potato was introduced as a major crop. The combination of the legislation and the new crop was ultimately disastrous.

The penal laws, together with other legislation, created a set of powerful and perverse incentives. Because Catholic tenant farmers could not own land or hold it on anything but short-term leases, with little or no security of tenure, they had no incentive to improve their land or modernize agricultural practice. All the benefit would go to the hated alien class of Protestant landlords in higher rents or more expensive leases.

By 1841, 45 percent of all holdings were of less than five acres. The lack of capital and the restraints on the Catholic majority meant that Irish commerce and manufacturing did not develop, and by 1841, 5.5 million out of a population of over 8 million were totally dependent on agriculture. The final, extra twist was the impact of the Corn Laws, the system of protection for English agriculture set up in the early nineteenth century that prohibited the import of grain until prices reached a particular level. This had the effect of preserving the flawed Irish farming system.

I'm not sure if you read your second link, but it doesn't refer to any particular famine. You'll have to be more specific.

[0] https://fee.org/articles/lessons-of-history-the-great-irish-...