The Population Bomb

The Population Bomb: Finding Balance in Numbers
By Roar Bjonnes

Many scientists, from the Worldwatch Institute to the United Nations--informs us that we are heading into the twenty-first century as a world divided in two: a small number of rich, educated, and wasteful societies and a large number of poverty-stricken, resource-depleted countries whose populations are doubling every twenty-five years or less.

Here are the staggering numbers: It took the children of Planet Earth millions of years to reach the first billion, then 123 years to get to the second, 33 years to the third, 14 years to the fourth, 13 years to the fifth billion. The sixth billion will come, according to one United Nation's forecast, in another 8-10 years. For many scientists, that's far too many hungry folks to feed on this fragile planet. There are two choices, they claim: we either institute population control or race toward oblivion.

Conventional wisdom has taught that we have had too many people for some time. Since Paul Ehrlich wrote his explosive, bestselling book The Population Bomb in 1968, most people have assumed that decline in standards of living, poverty, and environmental degradation are largely a result of overpopulation. Therefore, they argue, population must be reduced at a rapid pace to avoid catastrophe. Negative Population Growth, a U.S. non-profit organization, stated in a one page ad in the Christian Science Monitor that "We need a smaller population in order to halt the destruction of our environment, and to create an economy that will be sustainable over the very long term."

Others, including a Finnish best-selling philosopher, take a more extreme view. According to him, the world can continue to be habitable only if a few billion people are eliminated; another world war would therefore be "an occasion to celebrate." In the United States, some environmental extremists have said that the AIDS epidemic is a positive development and that it may help restore ecological balance. Yet others, such as the French novelist Jean Raspail, are expressing their existential fear at the arrival of two planetary "camps," North and South, separate and unequal worlds that soon will clash in a global war of demographics: the rich North will fight for its life against mass immigrations from the poor South. In his controversial novel, published in Paris in 1973, he describes an apocalyptic near future in which a million desperate Indians arrive at the French Riviera in an armada of decrepit ships. Soon poverty stricken hordes from Africa also start invading Europe, and "their number is like the sand of the sea."

In the United States, where liberal immigration policies has been the norm, the public mood is shifting toward the "let's take control of our borders" camp. "Not since Genghis Kahn rode out of the Asian steppes has the West--Europe as well as the United States--encountered such an alien invasion," wrote the Washington Times columnist Samuel Francis. His fellow columnist Paul Craig was even more blunt. He predicted a "cataclysmic future." "Not since the Roman Empire was overrun by illegal aliens in the fifth century has the world experienced the massive population movements of recent years," he wrote.

The world's population is indeed increasing rapidly and naturally many people are frightened. But the alarmist views expressed above are not all that sound. First, migrants to the West are usually not the poorest of the poor. In fact, they are often well educated and therefore, as many economists argue, contribute greatly to the welfare of their new homelands. Secondly, the greatest migrations in recent history consisted of the millions of Europeans who "illegally entered" the Americas, Africa, and Australia during the past few hundred years. Thirdly, the argument that an increase in population is the main cause of a proportionate increase in poverty and environmental destruction, is according to some scientists, simply not true. The most densely populated country in the world is, after all, not China or India--it's Holland. Fourthly, environmental destruction often blamed on overpopulation in the Third World is instead perpetrated by multinational corporations from the rich, so-called First World. The rainforest logs cut in the Philippines are not for domestic consumption, for example, they are exported to become toothpicks and furniture in Japan, the United States and Europe.

Some unconventional thinkers, including the late American inventor and environmentalist, R. Buckminster Fuller, claimed that the arguments of overpopulation are completely unfounded. Fuller, who calculated that the planet has enough resources to support at least 40 billion people, suggested that the solution was to "optimize the way we use the world's resources. Do more with less." Sarkar echoed Fuller's sentiments by stating that "the tragedy is that even though there are enough resources to supply food to all human beings on the planet, due to defective socio-economic systems, an efficient method of distribution has not been developed." The real problem, it appears, is not one of numbers but of limited vision. Selfishness and lack of proper planning--not too many babies--are the real causes of this complex predicament.

Studies have also proven that there is no need to fear overpopulation in a society where people are healthy, well educated and enjoy a good standard of living. In Scandinavia, for example, the purchasing capacity and education of the people is high, and consequently they do not face the problem of overpopulation. (Sweden's fertility rate, for example, is at "the replacement level" of 2.1)

The state of Kerala in India is another case in point. With a population of 29 million, this state has a higher population than many countries, including Canada. Kerala, like China, and unlike the rest of India, has high levels of basic education, health care, and female workforce participation. Kerala's fertility rate is 1.8. This has been achieved without any coercive policies. In comparison, China's fertility rate--achieved with the most coercive policies in the world-- is 2.0. Kerala has a female literacy rate of 86 percent; China's rate is 68 percent. Life expectancy is also longer in Kerala than in China--for men 71 years to 67 years, and for women 74 years to 71 years. This proves that Kerala's and Scandinavia's greater social gains have been more effective in reducing population growth rates than has China's more coercive methods.

The rightful concerns about environmental destruction, poverty and hunger are often channeled into wrongful alarmism about overpopulation. The earth is abundant enough in food resources to feed many times more than the present population. Due to lack of coordinated cooperation, voluntary simplicity, applied social ethics, and sensible planning, the world society has been fragmented into many belligerent groups and sub-groups, and rich and poor nations have been artificially created. As a result of this fissiparous tendency, society is presently incapable of producing enough food to meet human requirements.

Population growth will find its own level of prama if these factors exists in society:

* Guaranteed purchasing capacity to all members of society. As mentioned above, when people enjoy a good standard of living--in harmony with ecological principles--the chances of overpopulation will be minimal.

* All members of society should have the right to enjoy sound physical and mental health as well as a high standard of education. Sound, balanced people create sound, balanced cultures. And a healthy culture is one that channels its physical and psychic potentials toward spiritual pursuits. Ladakh is a good eample. Primarily a Buddhist people, the Ladhakis lived in economic, ecological, cultural, and spiritual harmony for at least a thousand years. Population was stable until the recent
introduction to Western, pseudo-cultural values and a highly inequitable economy.

* Society must adopt a bottom-up, rainforest economy. Such an economy will ensure the rational distribution of collective wealth through a well-knit cooperative system, implement decentralized socio-economic planning, and secure maximum utilization of all types of physical, psychic and spiritual potentialities. Ultimate social and ecological balance will occur when economics will free humans from mundane problems and will have increasing opportunities for intellectual and spiritual liberation.