Storyteller dolls form my collection. 

Should the population be controlled?

Several weeks ago, I mentioned how time-consuming it is to research the pros and cons of moral dilemmas. I presented ten ethical issues our country faces.  They are all complicated. I decided to tackle a few to help you fm an opinion. I only ask that you put away preconceived notions and be open to new information. Consider debating the issue over dinner and switching  sides halfway through the discussion. It’s the best way I’ve found to understand ethical issues.

Should we impose population controls as suggested by numerous scientists, or should we listen to religious leaders and economists?

Background

In 1798, Thomas Malthus, an Anglican clergyman, predicted that the earth would have standing room only by 1890. The population at the time was around 500 million but growing so fast in the former colonies that it doubled every 23 years. He was concerned that food couldn’t keep pace. Malthus’ arguments were embraced by the British who used them as an argument to get rid of the poor. 

Charles Darwin’s theories added fear as improved healthcare interfered with natural selection. The poor, who were the most prolific, were surviving into adulthood. Plague, pestilence, and unfiltered water were being managed to help them live longer. As their ranks grew, there became a push to stop the “unfit” from having children, and Eugenics was born. 

The Nazis grabbed onto U.S. research and took it a step further by promoting pure bloodlines and arousing fear in the wealthy who already felt threatened by the poor.  The controversy grew as to who was considered fit and who was not. John D. Rockefeller’s draft charter of the 1952 Population Council had a paragraph encouraging parents with above-average intelligence to have larger families. Research centers were established in poor countries with the goal of developing population control programs. William Vogt, national director of Planned Parenthood in 1948, wrote The Road to Survival, a widely read book documenting the negative effects of an expanding population on the environment. 

After World War II, developed countries sent medicine and aid workers to developing nations to the distress of eugenicists.  The result was a reduction in mortality rates with birthrates remaining high.  Over the 200 years following Mathus’ prediction, Western technology and agriculture increased food production so the world could feed itself. Advances in seed breeding, soil nutrient replenishment, irrigation, and mechanization kept the food supply staying ahead of the population curve. At the same time, the demand for energy, water use, transportation, and communication also rose.

Then came the bomb and the fear of a mega-ton Nuclear explosion. Dixie Cup founder, Hough Moore, initiated the population Action Committee to mobilize against the impending crisis.  He The Population Bomb, a pamphlet promoting that overpopulation would “create an explosion as disruptive and dangerous as the explosion of the atom.” 

Moore convinced the public that population controls would stop the Communists from raping women, a method they used to gain power. Though it was a lie, it didn’t seem so far-fetched, for impregnating women was often used by conquering warriors as a means of spreading their seed on foreign soil.

In Malthus day, no one thought that advances in public health, family planning, contraception, and urbanization might decrease fertility rates. But, that is what happened, and the public started to believe that the population rate was on the decline.

But halt! The Industrial Revolution came along, initiating a negative environmental trend as fossil fuels were fed into machines. Nations dug deeper for minerals, fished the oceans with more giant nets, and dammed rivers for electricity. Forests were cleared for agriculture, housing, and factories. A burgeoning population consumed rich stores of resources, depleting the earth’s natural capital.

In more affluent areas, fertility rates lowered to 2.6, slightly above replacement. In poorer regions, it was 5.1 children per woman. Yet, the fewer children in the wealthier countries caused the most damage. They consumed most of the resources and kept the rest of the world in poverty. The United Nations Population Division recently warned that the world is on course for 9.2 billion people by mid-century and the trend will continue. Is it Inevitable?

WHY POPULATION MATTERS

“All our environmental problems become easier to solve with fewer people, and harder — and ultimately impossible — to solve with ever more people,” said Sir David Attenborough who believed that women’s empowerment, easy access to high-quality education, and family planning will help ensure that everyone can have a decent standard of living on a healthy planet in the future. 

Romania went the other way and banned abortion and contraception in 1966. Maternal mortality rates jumped and thousands of children were placed in poorly funded orphanages. A culture of fear was created that eroded social relationships and affected the broader society. There weren’t enough doctors to care for the increase in babies and mothers, and a generation of mentally ill, retarded children plagued the country. Black market abortions flourished until the ban was repealed in 1989.

Statistics can be difficult to interpret. The U.S. Census Bureau reports that between 2007 and 2020 the Total Fertility Rate went from 2.12 to 1.64, below the necessary rate of population maintenance. They project that it could go as low as  0.5 percent by 2050.” That, however, is not the same as population growth, for it doesn’t take into account immigrants or continued improvements in healthcare. Between 2010 and 2020 (census data) the population of the United States increased by 7.4 percent. It now stands at 338,289,000 people. Is this alarming?

Many economists argue that a lower birthrate will bring about unintended consequences. There will be fewer working adults to pay taxes and more elders in need of support. A declining population will make fewer purchases causing the GDP to tank and cause a recession. Though China’s One Child Policy is credited with preventing 400 million births, it also produced 30 million bachelors with too few eligible women.

Despite an eightfold increase in population since 1798 and the climate crisis they instigated, objectors to population control tout that more births will raise the number of geniuses to invent what’s needed for progress. They say that if genocides from war aren’t replenished it will impact economic and societal growth. They want humans to be free to reproduce and believe entrepreneurs and scientists will find new ways to govern the planet that produce a moral, socially responsible sustainable society.

Will future technology develop ways that don’t deplete our natural capital? Can solar and nuclear power produce unbounded energy to meet our needs? Will the government stop industry from polluting streams, oceans, and air? Do we want the poor to earn fair wages so they’re not homeless? And–if they do become wealthier, will their purchasing power be good as it adds to pollution and global warming?

Is the world doomed to Malthus’ projections?  No one really knows, but we do know that the earth cannot support the seven billion people who are alive today in the style of middle-class Americans. 

References:

Attenborough,Sir David (2022 website) The Facts about Population. Population Matters. website. retrieved from https://populationmatters.org/the-issue?

2022. Steven Mosher.  References: Human Depopulation Agenda/ facts vs myths. Population Research Institute. https://www.pop.org/wb-subscribe/?

Sachs,J. (2008)  Are Malthus’s Predicted 1798 Food Shortages Coming True? Scientific American. retrieved from https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/are-malthus-predicted-1798-food-shortages/

Cossins, d. (2017)The ethics issue: Should we impose population controls? retrieved from https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg23531331-300-the-ethics-issue-should-we-impose-population-controls/

Bianchi,J. 2017) Population Controls are Ill Advised and Inhumane. Fee Stories. retrieved from https://fee.org/articles/population-controls-are-ill-advised-and-inhumane/

Gallagher, M.(2011) Population Control: Is it a tool of the rich? BBC News. retrieved from https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-15449959

Oliveira, M. (2021) More crime in cities? On the scaling laws of crime and the inadequacy of per capita rankings_a cross-country study. BMC Springer Nature.  retrieved from https://crimesciencejournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40163-021-00155-8

Kligman, G. (2022) Romania’s abortion ban tore at society, a warning for U.S. The Washington Post. retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/made-by-history/2022/09/15/romania-exposes-how-abortion-bans-kill-women-rip-society-apart/

Website. U.S. Population 1950-2022 Macrotrends. retrieved from https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/USA/united-states/population

website. Why is the U.S. Birth Rate Declining. PRB.retrieved from https://www.prb.org/resources/why-is-the-u-s-birth-rate-declining/