MAIN POINTS
ENCYCLOPEDIA
MOTHER CULTURE
INDEX TO ISHMAEL
ESSAYS
RESOURCES
LINKS
GUESTBOOK
by moonwatcher
The human population is growing at a staggering rate. In a few years, for the first time in human history and prehistory, there will be people who have seen the world's population triple in size within their lifetime. Things are getting dangerous, and we have perhaps already passed the carrying capacity of the earth.
One principle of biology essential to understanding ecosystems is the fact that a population of any organism will grow infinitely unless limiting factors come into play. The limiting factors may be one of many things, including a limited food supply, a birth control mechanism (such as breastfeeding for several years or artificial drugs), predation, disease, or a limited space within which to grow. If any of these factors effect the population, the population will grow less, and often it is enough to stop it growing altogether or lower it. In most species' populations, there is a limited food supply, there is disease, there is predation, and there is a limited space to grow in. These factors keep populations at a balance with each other. For instance, a well known example is the correlation between predator and prey populations. As the prey's population goes up, there is more food for the predators and their population goes up. Then, the increasing predators cause the prey's population to go down, thus causing the predator's population to go down again.
While this principle is well understood by biologists, it is seldom applied to the current human population. When all humans were gatherer-hunters [sic], our population was in balance with our surroundings because our food supply was limited, there was some birth control (extended breastfeeding for example), some disease, very infrequent predation, and a limited area (the tribe's territory). With the advent of farming or semi-farming in many places, the population of the farming tribe became somewhat higher, but it was not growing indefinitely, because they still had a limited food supply, they still had disease, they still had birth control, and they still had a limited space to grow in. All these things kept farmers from increasing indefinitely.
But then one culture, in the Middle East, began farming in an extremely intensive way that produced great food surpluses, their population began to go up. With an increased population, they had more disease, and still a limited space to grow in, but they had such great food supply that their population grew anyway, until they had completely filled up their territory and worn out their land. So they decided to overrun their neighbors' territories, and use the land themselves, which they were able to achieve because of their great number.
This culture's population continued to grow unchecked for thousands of years as they forced themselves onto other's land and used it to farm for themselves. Eventually, they reached the point where nearly all the arable land in the entire world was under their cultivation, and they had no where else to go. They reached the point where they had run out of room to grow in: and their population would have to stop growing.
Now our culture is telling us that our population is growing because we keep having babies, and that we need to use birth control to stop it. This ignores the fact that it is our increasing food production that is causing the problem.
Daniel Quinn suggests that if we stopped increasing food production, and just kept it at the level it's at now, population would stop increasing, and no one would be starving any more than they are now. He uses an example of an island with a million people on it, and explains that if you give them the same amount of food next month that you did this month, that they won't be starving any more than they are now.
But this example ignores the fact that our population is growing. In an increasing population, because there is enough food for the women to get pregnant, there will be more people in the future. If you stop increasing the food, the people who are born afterwards will not have any food. There will only be enough food for the amount of people there were last month, and not enough for the amount this month--and those born since will simply starve. This means that the increasing population will be starving more than they were before--which is what Quinn said wouldn't happen.
Another thing Quinn says is that birth control simply doesn't work in reality to limit a whole population's growth, that only limiting food supply can do that. This is true as long as humans all agree to limit food supply. I don't see what makes this any more likely than everyone agreeing to use birth control.
As biology tells us, any one of a number of things, if used enough, limits a population. So disease, birth control, and limited space could also stop it--indeed, it looks as though limited space is going to stop it, in the very near future. But this will be at the expense of ourselves and many other species.
I know that this is a controversial subject, and it seems that each person has their own opinion. If you disagree with what I've said, and would like to discuss it, please email me.