Human angle :

How to approach the population problem

by Prof. Dr. Özer OZANKAYA

In the history of the development of scientific thought, calls for the avoidance of rigid thinking have been made systematıcally sınce the 17th century. The famous English philosopher, Francis Bacon’s encapsulates the thinking of this time by saying, “If a man will begin with certainties, he shall end in doubts.”

This thinking is also very relevant, and can be applied as an approach, to the rapid population growth which is becoming a growing concern and problem for humanity today.

Western countries were the first in the history of humanity to enter the process of industrialisation and hence to experience the rapid population growth of our times. The English priest Malthus made a prediction about this issue. He believed that because land is limited and human capability to reproduce is unlimited, food production can increase only with arithmetical speed, while population will increase at geometric speed. Unless measures such as never marrying, or marrying late, and avoiding sex outside marriage, are taken, it is inevitable that this imbalance will end with deaths on a mass scale due to epidemic diseases, wars and scarcity.     

Although these countries were the first ones to experience the destructive years of capitalism, where pregnant women worked for 16 hours a day and 6 year old children were expected to work for 14 hours a day, Malthus’ theory was falsified by the conditions of the industrial environment and put aside. In the conditions of industrialised cities, the masses realised that the social environment was not unchangeable, but that it could be understood with reason, and its unwanted elements could be adjusted, so that conditions could improve after much democratic struggle. Thus it was understood that births and deaths were not only “biological” facts; rather they were “cultural” events shaped by social-economic conditions. It was seen that the conditions of the industrial environment had a limiting effect on the large number of births and deaths, especially infant deaths. Furthermore, scientific-technological developments achieved during the industrial environment largely increased agricultural (food) production.        

In brief, industrialised cities in Western countries managed, albeit after many struggles and with the aid of resources transferred from other countries, to reduce the infant death rate and increase life expectancy by – among other things - raising living standards, improving nutrition and health awareness, preventing epidemics and creating a healthy environment. Meanwhile, the level of education rose, including education of women, and women took more jobs and entered the professions. They increased their economic output and their living standards. Conditions became more egalitarian, liberating and individualist, the areas of human interest and expertise became stronger and more diversified. All this reduced the number of births.

In this way the population of Western countries reached a slow growth rate (in some of the industrialised countries there was zero-growth). This is the “modern balance”, where both birth and death rates are at very low levels.

The non-Western world

The second highest population growth spurt in history occurred in non-western countries, namely Asia, Africa and Latin America, after the Second World War. The Malthusian approach had been abandoned in the 19th century – or so it was thought – but in the face of this new “population boom” it has been re-adopted and still continues today.   

Neo-Malthusianism thinking has sought to find solutions to the problem of the “Population Boom” through providing contraception and various birth control techniques, voluntary sterilisation, planned parental courses and the distribution of handbooks and guides. This approach is known as social-Darwinist - in other words a racist approach - and ignores the fact that human reason is shaped according to the social-economic-cultural environment - not only in the West, but everywhere. 

Thus, the function given to Malthus’ theory is to explain the economic backwardness and poverty prevailing in four fifths of the world with rapid population growth, and to make it possible to overlook the question of responsibility for the international exploitation which prevents these countries from reaching the industrial-urban societies. Advanced societies were able to overcome the population problem essentially as a result of the industrialisation process. But today the world refuses to accept is that underdeveloped societies are experiencing a population problem because they have been prevented from becoming industrialised.      

This approach ignores the difference between correlation and causality. In other words, the appearance of two facts together does not necessarily mean that there is causality between them; it is possible that both can be attributed to another common cause. With respect to our subject, considering the rapid population growth as the main cause of underdevelopment (because population growth is rapid in underdeveloped countries) means that this difference is overlooked. Another unfair assumption would be to believe that rapid population growth is caused by the large family structure or vice versa. Just because the large family structure is widespread in rural areas where the population increases rapidly does not mean that one leads to the other.           

An artifical example

Furthermore, let’s suppose for a moment that we could curb the population increase in a given country by limiting the birth rate purely through the use of artificial means (pills, education etc.) - the much-prized method followed today. The effect on the population would not lead, for example, to agriculture in that country becoming equally or more productive with a lower level of manpower. However, if we take measures that would relieve agriculture from being dependent on manpower, in other words mechanise it, we can see that the population growth would actually decrease. So, it is also necessary to make the distinction between dependent and independent variables: whereas births and deaths are dependent variables, the implementation used for production necessary for living is an independent variable.           

The fertility structure of Western countries before industrialisation took place was very similar to the situation we see today in underdeveloped countries. Two German sayings sum up the situation: “Der Wunsch nach einem Sohn, ist der Vater vieler Töchter” (The desire for a son, is the father of many daughters!), and “Die Reichen haben die Rinder, die Armen die Kinder” (The rich have cattle, the poor have children).

Worlds apart

The industrial-urban environment and democratic political culture in the West have been the main independent variables that eliminated both poverty and high fertility rates. In particular, the need for women to work as a result of the increase and diversification in needs led to a strong sense of the necessity to limit births. The increasing concentration of the population in cities, where the average age of marriage is higher than in rural areas, has also decreased birth rates. Income has improved as well as the level of education, health and security. Conditions for raising children and their survival have greatly improved and limiting the birth rate does not bring with it the danger of remaining childless. A wide variety of fields of human interest and activity has opened up besides the raising of families.

In underdeveloped countries the industrial and urban environment cannot emerge, For the majority of the population, the division of labour and patterns of solidarity are mechanical rather than organic, and because life activities are not diversified, sexuality remains too important among human activities. For the same reason, women are deprived of basic human rights and freedom and the results are the same. The level and quality of education is extremely low and nutritional knowledge is weak, so the masses cannot be certain that their children will survive, since the infant death rate is so high. They cannot think about birth control under these circumstances and consequently continue to give birth to many children.    

In these countries, security services in the narrow sense are not provided and having a large family, especially many sons, is preferred for security reasons, and as a result the self-esteem of these families increases.   

The wrong strategy

As can be understood from these explanations, the strategy that should be followed to fix and balance the population boom in non-Western countries is to encourage these countries to reach industrial-urban conditions and to establish more democratic government which tries to eliminate various internal and external obstacles by learning from more experienced Western countries which have passed through similar circumstances in the course of history.    

Unfortunately, we are witnessing the exact opposite of this. In our post-modern period, capitalism is presented as being the goal of Jesus, and in order to maintain it, the industrial and financial institutions of the countries mentioned are being undermined, their natural resources are being exploited, their markets are being seized and their citizens are being used as cheap labour.     

The new Malthusianism is not merely content to emphasise “family planning” – complete with education, contraception and voluntary sterilisation. This was the Cold War era approach. Since the collapse of socialism, a new and incriminating argument has emerged to the effect that the peoples of non-Western countries are unthinkingly “giving birth to children as if eating olives and throwing away the stones”. This opens the door to a Population Reduction Strategy including the creation of economic crises, famines and hunger, and the triggering of regional and civil wars based on ethnic, religious and sectarian divides, as a possible solution to the population boom. American sociologist Susan George describes this social-Darwinist strategy with many supporting documents in her study The Lugano Report (Pluto Press, London, 1999).     

A better path

The strategy most appropriate for civilised humanity is to prepare for the future by learning from the past, to realise that it is possible to establish a social order within which all humanity can live happily in peace and prosperity, and to implement an international policy based on the understanding that every nation has the right to a level of development commensurate with contemporary science, art and technology – and that it is necessary to support, not hinder, nations in their efforts.         

Wise people can easily see that this well-intentioned plan, if followed by entire humanity, would be the most beneficial for their own personal and national prosperity.    

Today, approximately 40 percent of the population of underdeveloped countries is between the ages of 0-14, and another 50 percent are under the age of 40. In other words, for many years the rate of the biologically productive section of the population in these countries will be high. Yet at the same time these people are at the age when they can be most productive in the economic and cultural spheres. The sooner we start to remove the internal and external obstacles which they face in achieving conditions of industrial-urban-democracy, the surer we can be of the peace and happiness of the whole of humanity in future.        

Regrettably, the economic conditions dominating the world at present have yet to acquire a moral dimension. The neo-Malthusianism is one of the indicators of this anomy.   

( DIPLOMAT  -  June 2006  -  Ankara )