One of the reasons for the Second World War unleashed by the German Nazis was their belief that the population was multiplying too quickly. The leaders of the Third Reich were seriously afraid that due to the population explosion, the Germans would fall into poverty, would not be able to feed themselves, would start starving and die out, and therefore planned an invasion of the East - to fertile lands. As we remember, their struggle for resources ended in colossal slaughter and destruction of dozens of countries. Is this possible in the 21st century?
Malthus errors
In 1798, the English priest and scholar Thomas Malthus published the book "Essay on the Law of Population". Without unnecessary emotion, using urban statistics, he argued that the population is growing much faster than the means of subsistence he creates.
Malthus did not see a tragedy in this - on the contrary, he showed that the mechanism of self-regulation of the number exists by itself, manifesting itself in wars and epidemics. However, his theory did not give reason for optimism: it followed that humanity was not destined to escape from the eternal cycle of violence, because only it, according to Malthus, ensured a balance between the natural desire of man to leave numerous offspring and the ability of nature to provide human needs.
On this idea, a whole cultural and ideological trend, called "Malthusianism", grew up. Its essence is in the desire to limit the birth rate and thus prevent the growth of violence. In particular, it was proposed to impose sexual abstinence in every possible way, prohibit early and late marriages, and legally reduce the possibility of marriages among the poor, disabled and monsters. Two decades later, neo-Malthusianism appeared, whose adherents did not suffer from an excess of humanism and proposed more radical measures - up to the total forced sterilization of entire layers of the population.
Promotional video:
In particular, it was proposed to impose sexual abstinence in every possible way, prohibit early and late marriages, and legally reduce the possibility of marriages among the poor, disabled and monsters. Two decades later, neo-Malthusianism appeared, whose adherents did not suffer from an excess of humanism and proposed more radical measures - up to the total forced sterilization of entire layers of the population.
Dictionaries characterize Malthusianism as an "anti-scientific system of views", and this approach to the theory of Malthus and his followers is correct, since in their calculations they do not take into account a lot of factors: the redistribution of employment during the industrial revolution, uneven income structure in bourgeois society, qualitative leaps in development production and agriculture. Nevertheless, Malthusianism became extremely popular in the first half of the 20th century, it was used as the basis of the theory of "living space", which the Nazis of Germany borrowed to justify their aggressive plans of conquest.
All calculations of Malthus were canceled out by the “green revolution” that began in Mexico in the mid-1940s. The latest agricultural technologies, pest and climate change resistant wheat varieties, and wise land use allowed Mexicans to achieve food abundance in a short time and start exporting. Other countries intercepted Mexico's experience, and by the early 1970s, the threat of hunger that had plagued civilization for centuries had receded. Today, you can be sure: agriculture can feed everyone.
It would seem that Malthusianism should disappear along with the theory of "living space". However, it is back in fashion. Why?
Global problems
Modern neo-Malthusians are well aware that the problems of the 19th century are a thing of the past. And yet they say that the threat of overpopulation remains, having changed only the content.
The following arguments are given. Western civilization managed to overcome the "sores" of the agrarian way of life due to tough social modernization: the abolition of serfdom, the imposition of the priority of property rights, the destruction of community ethics in favor of individual labor, the emergence of universities that facilitate the rapid exchange of knowledge. The innovations pushed the growth of production efficiency, which was able to meet the basic needs of the population.
On a Chinese beach
Eastern civilization arrived at a similar result with a half-century delay, but used identical methods. At the same time, billions of people are still not embraced by Western values, their countries remain agrarian and poor, surviving on external assistance. The population there is growing, which means that a situation will soon arise when civilization will not be able to feed a useless horde. Food prices have already skyrocketed, and that's just the beginning!
To the problem of increasing the "surplus" population is added a shortage of fresh water. After all, it goes not only to public utilities - water is required for crops, steel giants, power plants, and mining complexes. In some countries (for example, Algeria, Japan, Hong Kong) fresh water has to be imported. Water is becoming an invaluable resource, and some futurologists write that bloody wars await us for access to moisture reserves: for example, to Lake Baikal.
It's time to die out
To cut the Gordian knot of accumulated problems, modern neo-Malthusians have put forward the concept of the "golden billion", gleaned from international environmental discussions in the late 1980s. It is curious that the concept itself was invented by Soviet scientists, among them academician Nikita Moiseev, who at a meeting in Rio de Janeiro said that in order to maintain the ecological balance, the Earth's population should be reduced to a billion people.
Soviet scientists were ashamed to say in what way the reduction should be carried out, but neo-Malthusians are always ready to speak instead of them. And the latter believe that developed countries should refuse to help developing countries, cut off their access to resources and knowledge, and also take a number of tough measures to limit the birth rate.
The prospect of implanting the concept of a “golden billion” looks daunting. In fact, it is proposed to arrange a high-tech genocide - and on a scale that even the leaders of the Third Reich could not imagine.
Fortunately, not all experts are inclined to believe in the “golden billion”. Quite indicative in this sense is the dispute that began between the biologist Paul Ehrlich, who considers it necessary to introduce radical measures to reduce the population, and the economist Julian Simon, who believes that the development of technology will in the long run ensure a decent standard of living for the population of any size: even for a billion, even for 100 billion.
To prove his case, Simon suggested that Ehrlich choose five types of raw materials, and if at least one of them rises in price in 10 years, the economist will pay 10 thousand dollars. Ehrlich gladly accepted the bet and chose five rare and expensive metals: tungsten, copper, nickel, chromium and tin. After 10 years, he was forced to publicly give money to an economist, because the rise in prices for rare metals provoked scientific research, engineers found substitutes, and the demand for these metals fell sharply, which ultimately led to a decrease in their cost.
Cause for optimism
However, faith in technological progress is not enough. After all, the population is growing not in developed countries (in them it is just shrinking, the only exception is the United States of America), but in the very poor, where, moreover, the level of education is close to zero. Qualitative leaps in technology will not help pull these countries out of poverty, and no one is going to reduce their population with carpet bombing or total sterilization, thank God.
So, we still can't get out of the "Malthusian trap"?
Our famous compatriot Academician Sergei Kapitsa built a multifactor model of demographic growth and showed that humanity, like technology, is experiencing systemic qualitative leaps and, after growth that will continue for another 100 years, will stabilize at a population of 12-14 billion people.
The Earth is quite capable of feeding such a number of people. And if we do not have enough resources, then there is always space, which we have just begun to explore. The most active part of the population can be sent to colonize neighboring planets. And then a completely different story will begin - of galactic humanity, the possibilities of which are difficult for us to imagine today.
Anton PERVUSHIN