Disturbed Podcast Narrator

But their local government acted quickly to support the cultivation of different crops in the late 1840s, creating new food sources. If they could avoid famine on the frontier, it seems like Ireland could have at least fared better, considering the support they had from their economically advanced colonizer.

But their local government acted quickly to support the cultivation of different crops in the late 1840s, creating new food sources. If they could avoid famine on the frontier, it seems like Ireland could have at least fared better, considering the support they had from their economically advanced colonizer.

So, let's look at what the British could have done differently, and what the outcome might have been. It's difficult to play the what-if game with accuracy. In terms of British strategies during the famine, let's consider the one that has the most data and relevant comparisons. The choice to keep Irish ports open for business.

So, let's look at what the British could have done differently, and what the outcome might have been. It's difficult to play the what-if game with accuracy. In terms of British strategies during the famine, let's consider the one that has the most data and relevant comparisons. The choice to keep Irish ports open for business.

So, let's look at what the British could have done differently, and what the outcome might have been. It's difficult to play the what-if game with accuracy. In terms of British strategies during the famine, let's consider the one that has the most data and relevant comparisons. The choice to keep Irish ports open for business.

Closing ports and therefore keeping food grown locally within the country was a tried and true strategy for overcoming crop failures in the 18th and 19th centuries. Ireland, Britain, and many other European countries had been using it for years because it worked. We don't necessarily have data to dig into exactly how effective it was, but it certainly helped.

Closing ports and therefore keeping food grown locally within the country was a tried and true strategy for overcoming crop failures in the 18th and 19th centuries. Ireland, Britain, and many other European countries had been using it for years because it worked. We don't necessarily have data to dig into exactly how effective it was, but it certainly helped.

Closing ports and therefore keeping food grown locally within the country was a tried and true strategy for overcoming crop failures in the 18th and 19th centuries. Ireland, Britain, and many other European countries had been using it for years because it worked. We don't necessarily have data to dig into exactly how effective it was, but it certainly helped.

When the potato blight hit Europe in 1845 and 1846, many nations in the region stopped exporting food. But Britain chose to continue exporting food from Ireland, arguing that closing the ports would hurt the Irish economy. This decision was the main thrust behind John Mitchell's argument that the British caused the famine in Ireland.

When the potato blight hit Europe in 1845 and 1846, many nations in the region stopped exporting food. But Britain chose to continue exporting food from Ireland, arguing that closing the ports would hurt the Irish economy. This decision was the main thrust behind John Mitchell's argument that the British caused the famine in Ireland.

When the potato blight hit Europe in 1845 and 1846, many nations in the region stopped exporting food. But Britain chose to continue exporting food from Ireland, arguing that closing the ports would hurt the Irish economy. This decision was the main thrust behind John Mitchell's argument that the British caused the famine in Ireland.

They not only took minimal steps to offset the loss of the potato harvest, they also removed other food from the island. But there is more nuance to consider. Some modern scholars have pointed out that simply holding on to other crops grown locally might not have prevented the famine. See, Ireland suffered from a major lack of infrastructure.

They not only took minimal steps to offset the loss of the potato harvest, they also removed other food from the island. But there is more nuance to consider. Some modern scholars have pointed out that simply holding on to other crops grown locally might not have prevented the famine. See, Ireland suffered from a major lack of infrastructure.

They not only took minimal steps to offset the loss of the potato harvest, they also removed other food from the island. But there is more nuance to consider. Some modern scholars have pointed out that simply holding on to other crops grown locally might not have prevented the famine. See, Ireland suffered from a major lack of infrastructure.

According to Celtic historian Mark McGowan, even if the ports closed... The food they held onto might not have been able to reach the people who needed it most. There's also the issue of cost. The potato blight would have driven up the price of grain and other unaffected crops. It would be hard for peasants, who normally barter or eat what they grow, to afford the expensive food.

According to Celtic historian Mark McGowan, even if the ports closed... The food they held onto might not have been able to reach the people who needed it most. There's also the issue of cost. The potato blight would have driven up the price of grain and other unaffected crops. It would be hard for peasants, who normally barter or eat what they grow, to afford the expensive food.

According to Celtic historian Mark McGowan, even if the ports closed... The food they held onto might not have been able to reach the people who needed it most. There's also the issue of cost. The potato blight would have driven up the price of grain and other unaffected crops. It would be hard for peasants, who normally barter or eat what they grow, to afford the expensive food.

Even though closing the ports might not have entirely prevented the disaster, some critics say that the British argument that maintaining trade was in Ireland's best economic interest is still pretty flimsy. Remember, the landlords making money from the exported food were mostly British, not Irish. Except it wasn't only the British making this argument.

Even though closing the ports might not have entirely prevented the disaster, some critics say that the British argument that maintaining trade was in Ireland's best economic interest is still pretty flimsy. Remember, the landlords making money from the exported food were mostly British, not Irish. Except it wasn't only the British making this argument.

Even though closing the ports might not have entirely prevented the disaster, some critics say that the British argument that maintaining trade was in Ireland's best economic interest is still pretty flimsy. Remember, the landlords making money from the exported food were mostly British, not Irish. Except it wasn't only the British making this argument.