Beyond Malthus On Population

[Leo Volont]

Beyond Malthus On Population Many people misunderstand Malthus “On Population”. They look at the great increase in population since Mathus’s time and ours and insist that he must have been wrong to be so worried about Population. Well, no. We can all remember that what Mathus was essentially saying was that Population is always hovering near its situational maximum, being checked from going much further by the contingencies of subsistence, violence, and disease. Malthus went into much detail in discussing checks to population expansion, but is less known for any discussion concerning Civilization’s efficiencies which allow for greater concentrations of population. Malthus must have been aware of the great densities of population then in China and India, as to be distinguished from the sparse figures in aboriginal America and Australia, where the glaring differences involved were that the greater Populations were Civilized, and the scattered populations were Primitive and Barbarian. What it must point out, in his own terms, is that Civilized Institutions are successful at mitigating the checks to population that are posed by subsistence constraints, by conflict and by disease. The problem then arises whereby so much of Civilized Population must depend upon the continuation of Civilized Institutions. In the surviving annals of any Lost Civilization, it is often remarked that once densely populated zones are reduced to expanses of vacant desert. Recently I saw a statistic that more than a half of the rice now consumed in the Far East is grown in the swamps of the American Southeast. Much of the produce and meat now consumed in the Great American East Coast Megalopolis is from Latin and South America. I suppose the great concentrations of population in Europe also feed from remote sources. This would all indicate to us that just an interruption in the civilized efficiencies in Transportation would cut off large sectors of population from their supporting sources of subsistence. But just as detractions and breakdowns within the Civilized Institutions can result in severe losses to population, so it is that further elaborations and refinements within Civilization could allow for even more Population. For instance, I could imagine that large scale world-wide emphasis on Salt Water to Fresh Water conversion and storage, leading to far broader levels of agricultural irrigation would allow for even denser and more expansive clusters of population. Eventually, what we would see is a World purposely engineered almost exclusively to support human population. Many other considerations, such as for the maintenance of regions of pristine nature, would have to be sidelined, just as now, for instance, they wish to bulldoze every Natural Park in the World for the sake of Energy Exploration. Going forward, the underlying assumption is that an expanding Population trumps all other considerations and priorities. However, if Population were limited by globally coordinated efforts toward Planning, focusing on granting incentives for postponing marriage, rewarding those remaining childless, while discouraging childbearing, perhaps by limiting career possibilities for those who chose to marry and raise families; if Populations were thus contracted by deliberate Institution, then the maintenance of these populations would be far less fragile and tenuous. Although History shows that every Civilization has so far declined and collapsed around the destructive influences of excessive concentration of Public Wealth into Private Hands, still, it should also be remarked that in each of these collapsing Civilizations there were severe shocks to the Society as various supports to the dense levels of Population were eroding – unrelieved famines, spreading epidemics, and unrestrained internal crime and rebellion and unopposed foreign invasion. As the dense populations lost their sense of Civilized safety and security, they would destabilize themselves, falling into revolt and rebellion, often exacerbating the very problems they had so much lamented. Also, as Populations expand, there is the risk that they become far more instable, particularly as resources are stretched to the breaking point regarding their Education and their assimilation. A Civilization can only safely maintain a Population contained enough so that it can be thoroughly integrated, where everyone can be made to feel ‘fat and happy’, so to speak. Where significant numbers are uneducated, unemployed and discontented, well, it must certainly throw a wobble into the fine balances in the running of the Civilized Machine. And if too much dysfunctionality is allowed to go forward, eventually we must see a breakdown to the entire System.

[Lucifer Sam]

Ya know Leo, I think if we stay away from personal affairs, you and I could get along quite well. I once again agree with you here. MAyn people took the work as stating that population would eventually reach a static threshold and then it would have to cease, or reverse, in order to keep the population in check with the available resources. What people don't get is that the threshold is dynamic. We reach the threshold of population all the time and do not realize it because we are constantly progressing to support more and mroe people. The only real risk that we run is that our child production over runs our sceintific advancement, if that happens, we may begin to see a rise in global poverty and starvation instead of just localized cases.

[Leo Volont]

Originally posted by Lucifer Sam Ya know Leo, I think if we stay away from personal affairs, you and I could get along quite well. I once again agree with you here. MAyn people took the work as stating that population would eventually reach a static threshold and then it would have to cease, or reverse, in order to keep the population in check with the available resources. What people don't get is that the threshold is dynamic. We reach the threshold of population all the time and do not realize it because we are constantly progressing to support more and mroe people. The only real risk that we run is that our child production over runs our sceintific advancement, if that happens, we may begin to see a rise in global poverty and starvation instead of just localized cases. Oh, that was what I wished to point out in my paragraph regarding the assimilation of Population -- that people for the most part get civilized educations and gainful employment. Well, that is exactly what is NOT happening all around the World today, in both the Advanced and the Developing Countries. In the Advanced Countries there seems to be a Banker's Goal of maintaining and sustaining a level of unemployment at about from 10% to 20%. And then, in Countries which try for a higher rate of employment, there the Education levels are so substandard that many of the people, though with jobs, are seriously underemployed. Honestly, one cannot compare on a par a part time janitor to a Engineer or a Doctor, though one can say that each is employed. Then, America publishes an Unemployment Rate of just 5% but then keeps a disproportionate number of its citizens in both the Military and in its Prisons. For instance, over 20% of America's Blacks are kept in prison. Probably a large number of Hispanics and Whites also. It is wonderful to claim 5% unemployment, but what is not said is that less then 80% are gainfully employed. It seems America rounds up its unemployed and puts them in one uniform or another. Then, all around the World we can see the rising levels of social rebellion and even terrorism as expressions of those who have not been positively assimilated and who resent it. Somewhere some study declared that Terrorism would effectively disappear as insignificant if everybody in the World could be employed at roughly $35,000 a year. But the level may very due to expectations. For instance, in Saudi Arabia, even some of the full blooded Bedoiun Arabs are annoyed that only the Royal Family gets to live like 'royalty'. What, with the huge Harem (which I suspect is accessed by more than just the King... I suspect he must be sharing his toys) but the THOUSANDS of sons and daughters of the King simply ride roughshod over the remainder of the population, and it is resented. Much of Al Quaida comes from that Society where decent men and women are frustrated with ever surrendering the best seats in the house to those blastedly ubiquitous Royal Bastards (after all, the Children of the First Wife may have some claim to prioritiy, but the spawn of some thousandth 'wife', brought in only to give some variety in bed, just as new cars are brought into the garage. But then to suppose the children from such institutionalized debauchery should be treated 'better' then honest men and women. It is no wonder that they should rebel. But especially in the Capitalist Advanced Economies where the Bankers are intentionally engineering a planned level of Unemployment -- establishing an Institutionalized sense of Insecurity and Desparation in order to artificially maintain a Low Wage. That is nothing more than a blast of Class Warfare and deserves a response in kind. One must wonder of the modern effeminate and cowardly worker who so willingly accepts a deliberate policy for Unemployement. I can only conclude that the Capitalist Masters had planned it out well enough that there is enough unemployment to create a sense of desperation, but not so much give anybody a sense of confidence in Rebellion. It reminds me of a law that the Roman Senate had enacted whereby it was mandated that each slave wear a special hat... so that Slaves could not get away with pretending to be Free Men. Well, when they saw just how many Slaves there actually were, they instantly repealed the Law, as they considered that if the Slaves knew just how many other Slaves there were, then it would occur to them that they would have the means, and the numbers, to successfull petition for change, or to succeed in Rebellion. If everybody only realized just how many others besides themselves were made to feel desperate and insecure in their employment, ... health care... education... security.... etc... then there might be some united action. But as for now, we are mostly slaves who aren't wearing our hats.

[dragonoverlord]

Leo You're wasting your brilliance on these people .

[dragonoverlord]

For instance, in Saudi Arabia, even some of the full blooded Bedoiun Arabs are annoyed that only the Royal Family gets to live like 'royalty'. What, with the huge Harem (which I suspect is accessed by more than just the King... I suspect he must be sharing his toys) . You seem to imply that the full blooded bedouins are jealous of the royal family and lust for the royal families wealth. Not so. In Saudi Arabia there is much mal conent for the royal family because they are stooges of the West, it is thought that the usa invasion of iraq could not of been possible without the cooperation of Saudi Arabia, thus implicating the Saudi Royal Family and the royals of Kuwait. Such cooperation with the west brings into question the Saudi royal families loyalty the arab world and to the Palestinian people. It is no secret most arabs in the middle east despise the palestinian people though. unfortunately. It is ironic however that in the wake of contempt on the part of the arab people towards the Palestinian people that Iran is one of the biggest supporters and friends to the Palestinian people. BY defacto Hezbollah is a great friend of the Palestinian people by virtue of their relationship to Hezbollah. Is it not ironic that the biggest friend to the palestinian people who are mostly sunni muslims are the shia muslims of Iran and Lebanon? Enough rambling.... my Secound point is the royal family has a disapropiate amount of wealth and makes no effort to hide it, while many people in their country live in poverty.

[Spartiate]

Uhm... who are you arguing with?

[dragonoverlord]

ya i know hes banned but still .....I couldnt resist.

[Universal Mind]

You seem to imply that the full blooded bedouins are jealous of the royal family and lust for the royal families wealth. Not so. In Saudi Arabia there is much mal conent for the royal family because they are stooges of the West, it is thought that the usa invasion of iraq could not of been possible without the cooperation of Saudi Arabia, thus implicating the Saudi Royal Family and the royals of Kuwait. You can't hate people and be jealous of them at the same time? I have seen evidence to the contrary. It is ironic however that in the wake of contempt on the part of the arab people towards the Palestinian people that Iran is one of the biggest supporters and friends to the Palestinian people. They should team up and stone homosexuals together or maybe blow up some orphanages to get even with the innocent children.

[dragonoverlord]

You can't hate people and be jealous of them at the same time? I have seen evidence to the contrary What?