Changing American institutions to regulate population growth

United States
August 27, 2009 3:53am CST
questia.com In the opening of Chapter 1: It is clear that the future course of history will be determined by the rates at which people breed and die, by the rapidity with which nonrenewable resources are consumed, by the extent and speed with which agricultural production can be improved, by the rate at which the underdeveloped areas can industrialize, by the rapidity with which we are able to develop new resources, as well as by the extent to which we succeed in avoiding future wars. All of these factors are interlocked. --Harrison Brown, 1954 Contributors: Paul R. Ehrlich - author, Anne H. Ehrlich - author, John P. Holdren - author. Publisher: W. H. Freeman. Published 1977. In Chapter 14: Changing American Institutions The ecological constraints on population and technological growth will inevitably lead to social and economic system different from the ones in which we live today. In order to survive, mankind will have to develop what might be called a steady state. The steady state formula is so different from the philosophy of endless quantitative growth, which has so far governed Western civilization, that it may cause widespread public alarm. --René Dubos, 1969 Mistrust of technology is an attitude that ought to be taken seriously. It has positive value in avoiding grave disasters. --Roberto Vacca, 1974 "It seems unlikely to us that disaster can be averted without dramatic changes in the structure of many American institutions" (ch.14) [b]From Population & Development Report (Congress Report) concerning [u]1994 Cairo Conference[/u] it was reported:[/b] Neither alternative is likely to gain the support of the Vatican, which, since the PrepCom ended, has campaigned vehemently against the conference document. It has sought support for its views from the developing world by accusing the West of "biological colonialism" in promoting family planning programs and has sought allies in the fundamentalist Islamic nations of Libya and Iran. Compromise appears unlikely. Discussing a conference that seeks to stabilize the world's population, Pope John Paul II has said that he opposes "all propaganda and misinformation directed at persuading couples that they must limit their family to one or two children." Although seemingly at odds with a majority of the world's nations, the Vatican appears determined to pursue its course at the Cairo Conference. http://cnie.org/NLE/CRSreports/General/gen-5.cfm Chapter 5: The History and Future of the Human Population, unfortunately is only available through member access so I'll have to request it through the local school here but here are some recommended readings that they did provide? Dumond, D. E. 1975. "The limitation of human population: A natural history". Science, vol.187, pp. 714-721 (February 28). Interesting article on ways in which various societies have controlled their population growth. Population Reference Bureau (PRB). Population Bulletin. PRB, Washington, D.C. This is a useful source of information for the educated layperson on virtually all aspects of demography. [b]Thompson, W. S., and D. J. Lewis. 1965. Population problems. 5th ed. McGraw-Hill, New York. A basic text.[/b] Borgerhoff, Luttbeg B.; Borgerhoff Mulder, M. and Mangel, M. S. (2000). To marry or not to marry? Holdren, John P. 1976. "The nuclear controversy and the limitations of decision-making by experts". Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, March, pp. 20-22. What to do when expert consensus is impossible. Hirsch, Fred. 1976. "Social limits to growth". Harvard Press, Cambridge, Mass. Argues that affluence breeds social dissatisfaction, generating socio- political limits on economic growth. Note especially the treatment of positional goals. Thought provoking. (Big Brother wants to be our friend? ) Boffey, P. 1975. The brain bank of America. McGraw-Hill, New York. Critique of the National Academy of Sciences. [b]Boulding, Kenneth E. 1966. The Economics of the coming Spaceship Earth. In Environ­mental quality in a growing economy, H. Jarrett, ed. Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore. A superb article about making the transition from a cowboy economy to a spaceman economy.[/b] "The closed economy of the future might similarly be called the 'spaceman' economy, in which the earth has become a single spaceship, without unlimited reservoirs of anything, either for extraction or for pollution, and in which, therefore, man must find his place in a cyclical ecological system". Also note: David Korten's "Cowboys in a spaceship" theme in his 1995 book [i]When Corporations Rule the World[/i] Illich, Ivan. 1971. Deschooling society, Harper and Row, New York. A provocative book of interest to all those concerned with the future of the educational system.
1 person likes this
6 responses
@Barbietre (1438)
• United States
28 Aug 09
When we first married we decided that we were not going to add to the over population so my husband and I had 2 children. I stand by OUR decision, I know of many people who have more childern and that is their choice, but there are some who are not even decent parents who should not have alot of children who still do.
• United States
28 Aug 09
I could give you an example but you don't need ME to tell you, I'm rather content with 2 daughters ages 3 (birthday girl) and 5 years old (in Jan) but I'll admit I already having anxiety about 'losing' my babies, once they go to school
@bigplay (212)
• United States
28 Aug 09
I don't know if i agree or disagree but, population growth needs to be controlled some how, but not in a wrong way. Kids are being born into poverty all over the world, population needs to either be controlled or something, something needs to be done, i just don't know what.
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
27 Aug 09
The question have for all "zero population growth" (and all the other ways to spell it) folks is... Ok, which of the kids alive today do you think shouldn't exist?
@Barbietre (1438)
• United States
28 Aug 09
So you think that by my using permanent birth control I prevented someone from being born that should have been. That is just plain stupid!
@iriscot (1289)
• United States
27 Aug 09
There is already a law in China that limits a married couple to one child. As we saw just recently during an earth quake in China, several children were killed. So those parents who lost their only child are left without one. There is no way the the United States should have such a law as that on the books. However, there is one situation that should concern all of us and that is unmarried women having babies by several men or by one man who takes no responsiblity for the children. Many of these women are "baby factories" in order to live off of social security and our tax dollars. They don't raise the child, they just grow them. There should be some way to put a stop to this, I don't care what the Pope or Catholic Church says about it.
@N4life (851)
• United States
27 Aug 09
I have read extensively many works of those mentioned as part of my studies in ecology, Natural Resources and Environmental Sociology. Knowing what I do about the current unsustainable practices of our world in general I understand why population controls have been implemented in place and considered in others. We must find another way in my opinion. Many of these same people who advocate such measures are the same to scream about equality and that sustainablity definitions must include the ability for humans to "flourish" and lead meaningful lifes. It is incompatible to have equality and flourishing humans and population control.
• United States
27 Aug 09
That really would not fly here in the US. The gov. does not have a right to tell people IF they can have kids or how MANY they can have. It is a personal decision. The gov. needs to stay out of it. I don't see the american people allowing it to happen here. I know China has laws limited each couple to one child and the people here do nothing about it. But here in the US the population would tar and feather any politican that even tried to pass a law like that.