It appears you are uncritically accepting the source provided by the OP, which is not consistent with other scholarship on the Bengali famine. The fact is there was a cyclone there which destroyed many of the rice crops. In the food market, people hoarded rice as a result of the cyclone as an investment because they perceived a shortage which actually did not exist, but the hoarding caused a de facto shortage. The Bengali government then incompetently failed to halt the exportation of rice. It appears that the origin of this famine was multi-causal. The author cited by the OP, who I have never heard, appears to be alone in calling it a genocide, let alone blaming it on Churchill.
I wouldn't prop up Churchill or anyone else as a hero and excuse any bad conduct. But you have to be wary of "historical revisionism" by those who have some kind of an agenda, or just want to attract attention with a controversial thesis that goes against the grain. Busting myths is great, but I smell bullshit here.
- wolf
You can be a nasty little holocaust denier if you want to be one.
However, the scholarship has been consistent that the famine was man-made primarily due to British policies. A Nobel Prize in Economics was partly awarded to one of the most prominent academics in the world partly due to his research on the issue. Many academics have suspected what this new writer has discovered, but there was no hard proof on Churchill's motivations. Now this author has discovered actual correspondence and papers that were previously unused.
It is not possible to dispute now without being a revisionist.
