Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Environment

It's Time to Fight Population Growth, Which Exacerbates Global Warming and Sprawl

By Katha Pollitt, The Nation. Posted April 9, 2007.


It's ridiculous that we don't fight attempts to promote population growth while we wring our hands over global warming, species loss and suburban sprawl.
Advertisement

Getting a better deal for mothers has been at the forefront of the feminist agenda for decades, although you'd never know it from the way the women's movement is always being accused of attacking women with kids. So it's ironic that what is finally driving at least some governments to act is the desire to boost fertility rates. The aim is to breed the next generation of workers -- ethnically correct workers, too, not the troublesome immigrant kind. As Sharon Lerner noted in The New York Times Magazine ("The Motherhood Experiment," March 4), fertility rates -- the average number of children per woman -- have fallen below replacement level in ninety countries, including such Catholic stalwarts as Ireland (1.9), Spain (1.3), Italy (1.3) and Portugal (1.4). Even the much-trumpeted increasing US population is mostly a product of immigration (the actual fertility rate is 2.0). While politicians in Japan (1.3) seem fatally drawn to chastising women as recalcitrant "baby-making machines," European governments have started asking if making life easier for working mothers might do the trick.

In the modern world, the traditional ways of producing large families -- early marriage, lack of sex ed and birth control, religious propaganda, community pressure, denial of education and jobs to women -- don't work so well, especially when combined with the high cost of living that prevails in many developed countries. Even in comparatively conservative countries like Greece (1.3), young women are going to college, working and postponing marriage, as young men have been doing for years. Faced with the choice between career and kids, a lot of women seem to be voting with their wombs. As Lerner notes, the countries with the most rigidly patriarchal families and the most sexist workplaces are the ones with the lowest birthrates. (That's something for the World Congress of Families to consider when it meets in May in Warsaw. Founded by right-wing "family values" ideologue Allan Carlson, the WCF inveighs against abortion, same-sex marriage and secularism and promotes large "natural families" and "religious orthodoxy." I don't get the feeling working moms are on the agenda.)

If fears of population implosion result in paid parental leave, improved childcare and more support for mothers' careers, it won't be the first time a government has done the right thing for the wrong reason. But isn't it weird to promote population growth while we wring our hands over global warming, environmental damage, species loss and suburban sprawl? The United Nations projects that in 2050 the world's population will reach 9.2 billion! When we think of overpopulation the usual image is of some teeming Third World slum, and indeed most population growth will come in the developing world. But actually it's the developed world that's doing the earth in. Every American uses as much energy as forty-eight Bangladeshis, and as many resources as an African village. Europeans and Japanese aren't far behind. What feels right for a nation or an ethnicity -- we need more Russians! more Italians! more Scots! -- might be wrong for the human race, to say nothing of polar bears.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: population, women, mothers, environment, global warming, climate change, urban sprawl

Katha Pollitt is a columnist for The Nation.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Environment! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Read between the lines
Posted by: Wassermann on Apr 9, 2007 12:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There is a hidden racist code embedded in this article...it reads: "Brown people: STOP HAVING SO MANY BABIES."

Somebody had to say it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: ead between the lines Posted by: HeroesAll
» Where does it state that? Posted by: drblack
» RE: ead between the lines Posted by: Theriomorph
» COW POOP Posted by: gellero
» No there isn't Posted by: bookie
» RE: Read between the lines Posted by: particle
» RE: ead between the lines Posted by: Doubtom
» Thanks... Posted by: JohnF
» RE: CIA World Fact Book Fertility Rates Posted by: rfrancis@godisdead.com
» RE: ead between the lines Posted by: tclaverdure
» RE: ead between the lines Posted by: yellow
» RE: ead between the lines Posted by: particle
Population decline is the only solution
Posted by: truthteller on Apr 9, 2007 1:22 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Six billion people isn't enough, it's too many. Other articles and comments posted here in the past week give many of the reasons why we have too many people for the planet to support without massive inputs of petroleum and natural gas based resources. Suffice it to say that the natural carrying capacity of the Earth is around 2 billion, and we will get back to there, whether we do it rationally, or allow the greedy corporate interests to take us over the brink and have it done the tradtional ways - war, famine plague and pestilence. Oh, and all the corporate shills saying that "big renewables" will save us - ethanol, bio-diesel, wind, solar, nuclear, etc. are just full of it.

Nothing can replace the BTU density or convenience of light, sweet crude oil, which is either at or near peak production.

The only humane solution is to draw down World population within a generation to under 2 billion. I do not expect this to happen. I fully expect those pulling the strings to run the planet into the ground, because "They got their's".

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Humane solution? Posted by: ateo
» RE: Well, let's see Posted by: ateo
» RE: Well, let's see Posted by: Pine
» Use market forces against the stupid Posted by: eddie torres
Another BOOORING AlterNet post!
Posted by: HughScott on Apr 9, 2007 2:15 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Any journalist who starts an article with, “It's Time to Fight Population Growth,” should shake off the last of their Rip Van Winkle sleep and find something more relevant to write about. This subject has been addressed too many times to count, going back at least 40 years (I’m 71).

Hugh E. Scott, editor of FreedomCentralUSA.com, an investigative website dedicated to the destruction of domestic fascism (neoconservatism) using truth and the Internet as WMDs.

I also edit King-George.biz -- the only website with hardcopy proof of White House corruption.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Blinkered vision? Posted by: Rod from Canada
» Uh, yeah... Posted by: JoshuaLudd
» RE: Truth Posted by: ateo
» The truth is odd. Posted by: eddie torres
» RE: Truth Posted by: sheena2u
» Shared Sacrifice Posted by: pdxstudent
» RE: Shared Sacrifice Posted by: sheena2u
Too Many People...children are no miracle
Posted by: drblack on Apr 9, 2007 2:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Having kids is what our animal instincts demand of us. It takes strong awareness to NOT have kids.
It is down right dumb to think that only non-whites should stop having kids as the first comment says. All couples should have only one child at most for the next hundred years.
Untill we develop better technologies and hopefully expand beyond this one planet those who have children should be frowned on.
There are plenty of people on this planet and we should move some of them around from overpopulated places to the aging west.
If we do not start managing our resources more intelligently we will have war,disease and famine and our population will be decreased for us by nature.
Children are no miracle. It is the most easy and common thing to have a kid. Children may have been an asset in the past but now they are a burden.
The same emotional people who scream when a non-life ,with no memories or higher brain functions is terminated will be screaming for forced abortions when they realize that they can no longer live comfortably when the world population doubles in 50 years or so.
Why is ignorance mistaken for innocence anyway?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Take away the incentives Posted by: Inlander
» incentives? give me a break! Posted by: EasterBunny
» please see my post below Posted by: EasterBunny
» RE: Take away... Posted by: sheena2u
» RE: Take away... Posted by: Inlander
Too Many People...children are no miracle
Posted by: drblack on Apr 9, 2007 2:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Having kids is what our animal instincts demand of us. It takes strong awareness to NOT have kids.
It is down right dumb to think that only non-whites should stop having kids as the first comment says. All couples should have only one child at most for the next hundred years.
Untill we develop better technologies and hopefully expand beyond this one planet those who have children should be frowned on.
There are plenty of people on this planet and we should move some of them around from overpopulated places to the aging west.
If we do not start managing our resources more intelligently we will have war,disease and famine and our population will be decreased for us by nature.
Children are no miracle. It is the most easy and common thing to have a kid. Children may have been an asset in the past but now they are a burden.
The same emotional people who scream when a non-life ,with no memories or higher brain functions is terminated will be screaming for forced abortions when they realize that they can no longer live comfortably when the world population doubles in 50 years or so.
Why is ignorance mistaken for innocence anyway?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

To Feed is to Breed – A. Huxley
Posted by: White middleclass male on Apr 9, 2007 3:04 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Guess what folk, you can be an environmentalist or a humanitarian but not both.

If you want to help the planet stop babying the people that are to stupid to provide for themselves. Natural selection used to apply to humans once too.

Or we could just cut down some more rain forest for cattle ranching.

I would rather see the wildlife left alone than provide for one more god damn ape that will multiple exponentially based on how stupid and poor they are.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Living in Poverty? Posted by: veggiegrrrl
» RE: Living in Poverty? Posted by: PirateJesus
» RE: Actually... Posted by: ateo
» RE: Actually... Posted by: John Rice
» RE: Actually... Posted by: JoshuaLudd
Change the Tax Codes
Posted by: socialpsych on Apr 9, 2007 3:50 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In my part of the world (Pennsylvania), pro-natalism is built into the tax system. No matter how many kids a couple has, they pay the same amount of local school taxes as someone who has no kids. So, large families are being subsidized by communities of taxpayers, many of whom are empty-nesters, retired, or child-free. There is nothing fair or equitable about this arrangement, but worse, it encourages people to have lots of kids. The solution is a per-child tax that refelects the actual cost of educating each kid.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Change the Tax Codes Posted by: Rolomax
» RE: Change the Tax Codes Posted by: socialpsych
» RE: Change the Tax Codes Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: Change the Tax Codes Posted by: Lincoln fan
» RE: Change the Tax Codes Posted by: socialpsych
» RE: Change the Tax Codes Posted by: Basenjis
» RE: Change the Tax Codes Posted by: mazel
» RE: Change the Tax Codes Posted by: Inlander
» RE: Change the Tax Codes Posted by: mazel
» RE: Change the Tax Codes Posted by: wolfcry
» RE: Change the Tax Codes Posted by: Ayla87
» RE: Change the Tax Codes Posted by: mazel
Global baby boom fuels warming, pollution, degradation
Posted by: Moonray on Apr 9, 2007 3:50 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How nice to see someone finally stating the obvious: Our burgeoning populations worldwide are destroying our planet.

In America family planning remains a tough sell for cultural reasons:

1. We are bombarded with right-wing Christian propoganda that depicts even the tiniest fetus as a perfectly formed little human instead of the microscopic blob it really is.

2. American girls associate having children with sophistication and adulthood. Babies in turn are viewed as status symbols.

3. Our multibillion-dollar marriage-wedding-divorce industry promotes constant childbearing to sell an endless stream of child-targeted products.

Industrialization has forced humans into teeming cities, but, like most large animals, we actually need several square miles of territory per person to function normally -- and sanely. Much of the negative behavior associated with modern living is brought about at least in part by our crowded living conditions.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It can't just be on a voluntary basis
Posted by: grim ripper on Apr 9, 2007 5:40 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...because that would set up an undesirable genetic selective force:
The people who are conscientious enough to care and love the environment wouldn't breed, so these desirable genes would be selected against. Meanwhile, the people who don't give a damn, or who respond to incentives, or who steep themselves in catholic delusion will go on having huge families, propogating undesirable genes.
Thus, it has to be regulated, perhaps by some future government that actually works instead of roaring along, fueled by high-octane evil.
It's not racist to say brown people are having too many babies if they're the ones who are having too many babies, you PC nitwit

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Birth Control
Posted by: alibaba on Apr 9, 2007 5:54 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Well let's get right to it. There is a lot of "stupid" racist crap being written here, with the possible exception of the person who pointed out that the same morons who are "pro life" will be the same morons calling for forced sterilization.
The best form of birth control is hope! When the desperately poor people around the world (most of whom have had their resources exploited by the people with "desireable genes") come home from digging in a garbage pile for a living, the only possible comfort they have is to get laid. After all, are they supposed to put on tuxes and go to the fucking opera. It has been established that in places where micro loans are provided to poor women birth rates go down. Share the resources. Help poor people. Give them hope. The stupidest people on earth are the ones who elected George Bush twice, whatever the color of their genes.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Birth Control Posted by: John Rice
How overpopulation will resolve itself.
Posted by: KeepsonTickn on Apr 9, 2007 6:09 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If we don't fix overpopulation, it will fix itself, and I don't like to think about how it will happen. If world population reaches 9 billion by 2050, I guarantee it will be under a billion by 2150.

Read the book 'Collapse; How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed.' It has happened before. The people of Easter Island cut down every tree on the island, while maintaining an unsustainable population and carving monuments to their folly.

All our vaunted technology will just make the collapse worse, unless we begin very soon to manage our world toward sustainability of population and of resources.

One thing that is certain already. The world we leave our grandchildren will be a poor shadow of the world our grandparents left us.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

European nations control their population, others flood the world...
Posted by: ateo on Apr 9, 2007 6:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
with babies. That's where we are today and where we will continue to be in the future.

Low birth rates among Western nation's native populations isn't going to impact the overall world population in a significant way unless you can convince the other 4.5 billion people on Earth today to follow suit. Go ahead and have 1 child per Western woman, women in Asia, South America, and Africa are more than happy to have 4 or 5 rendering your sacrifice null and void.

What is the end result of Western nations committing cultural and ethnic suicide by reducing population levels while others increase theirs? A giant slum world filled with poor uneducated people and a few wealthy nations living large for a few generations until the party comes to an end? Sounds like life today to me.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Start having babies.....NOW!
Posted by: dikaiosyne on Apr 9, 2007 6:24 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Here is what we can expect. The third world continues to have children at more than replacement rates. The western democracies continue to bear children at less than replacement rates. In a generation the third world over runs the western democracies with the expanded demographics. You want an example of where this is happening as we speak look no further than the French. Presently they have a negative replacement level in births except for the Muslim communities in their midst. A generation from now w/o change and you'll see France become an Islamic society where French will be defined as someone who is of Middle Eastern origins living in that country. As far as here in this country.....unless we shut off the valve allowing illegals in this country and we "natives" start having children again we shall go the way of France. Only our country will be under the control of brown Spanish speaking people. We need a new "baby boom".

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Love the alliteration! Posted by: Wassermann
Who's agenda are we seeing here?
Posted by: rwa on Apr 9, 2007 7:01 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Cecil Rhodes and his gang, leaders of the Round Table and their respective wills and credos:

"We are the living sponsors of the great Cecil Rhodes will of 1877, in which Rhodes devoted his fortune to: ’the extension of British rule throughout the world... the colonization by British subjects of the entire Continent of Africa, the Holy Land, the Valley of the Euphrates, the islands of Cyprus and Candia, the whole of South America, the islands of the pacific not heretofore possessed by Great Britain the whole of the Malay archipelago, the seaboard of China and Japan, the ultimate recovery of the United States of America as an integral part of the British Empire...’

We stand with Lord Milner’s Credo. We too are ’British Race patriots’ and our patriotism is ’the speech, the tradition, the principles, the aspirations of the British Race.’ Do you fear to take this stand at the very last moment when this purpose can be realized? Do you not see that failure now is to be pulled down by the billions of Lilliputians of lesser race who care little or nothing for the Anglo-Saxon system?"

"This is the time to save the Anglo-Saxon race and it most glorious production: the Anglo-Saxon system of banking, insurance and trade."

Prince Philip Mountbatten wrote the foreword to the 1987 book 'If I Were An Animal,' by Fleur Cowles. His foreword was titled 'People as Animals' and read:

"I just wonder what it would be like to be reincarnated in an animal whose species had been so reduced in numbers that it was in danger of extinction. What would be its feelings toward the human species whose population explosion had denied it somewhere to exist? ... I must confess that I am tempted to ask for reincarnation as a particularly deadly virus."

In an August 1988 interview with the West German Deutsche Press Agentur he is supposed to have said: "In the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus, in order to contribute something to solve overpopulation."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» More crazy old stuff Posted by: Inlander
» WRT species in danger of extinction... Posted by: MartianBachelor
Global Warming - Doomsday Called Off
Posted by: rwa on Apr 9, 2007 7:06 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
a CBC documentary

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Islamic Europe?
Posted by: bgeerdes on Apr 9, 2007 7:55 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's really easy to write off concerns of an Islamic Europe as racist, but what will all of you think when/if Europe starts looking more like Saudi Arabia? Where homosexuality is illegal, you can't practice any religion other than Islam and women can't drive cars? It's not the skin color. It's the Culture, Stupid. (To paraphrase a Clinton motto.)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Yes! It is about culture Posted by: Laplandi
The Best Birth Control is Female Education
Posted by: floridajudy on Apr 9, 2007 7:55 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Educated women have fewer children, period. The reverse correlation between the level of education a woman achieves and the number of children she births cuts across all national and racial lines. Offer a woman a choice between making a decent living and being a full-time baby maker and she'll vote with her womb.

So: if you're worried about over-population, do all you can to make sure ALL young women have the opportunity to learn as much as they can. Unfortunately, the present administration seems wedded to the Right Wing agenda of "keeping women in their place". It's a national disgrace.

I hope this unholy alliance will end soon.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Confusion Posted by: MartianBachelor
I have a solution!
Posted by: Temporary on Apr 9, 2007 8:09 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How about having a world war? We havent had one it 60-years;((!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

MY WIFE AND I USED FAMILY PLANNING
Posted by: poppop_schell on Apr 9, 2007 8:20 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When I was getting my doctorate at IU-Bloomington in the 1970s, we had three small children. Several times when my wife was shopping with our children, some population control NUTcase would come up to her and say something like, "your a disgrace. You're destroying the planet. Don't you believe in family planning?"

My wife would smile and say, "Yes, we believe in family planning. We plan to have six children."

I say to all the people who don't want children, don't have them. Parenthood is a very demanding thing. Children must be wanted, loved and nurtured. I suggest that those who want to make sure families are limited to one or two children, you already have a place to live where it si the law to limit family size. Forced abortions occur regularly. I have a ticket to Communist Chima for you.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: MY WIFE AND I USED FAMILY PLANNING Posted by: apophenia_monkey
» Ah, Elder Poppop speaks... Posted by: doctorsquared
» RE: Ah, Elder Poppop speaks... Posted by: poppop_schell
» You are a disgrace. Posted by: WhatNow?
» RE: You are a disgrace. Posted by: apophenia_monkey
» RE: You are a disgrace. Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: You are a disgrace. Posted by: fork
» RE: You are a disgrace. Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: You are a disgrace. Posted by: fork
» RE: You are a disgrace. Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: You are a disgrace. Posted by: fork
SUCH SILLINESS AND NEGATIVISM IS ASTOUNDING
Posted by: poppop_schell on Apr 9, 2007 8:39 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Just as overpopulated areas of the world has led to migrations to less populated areas, the same will occur in the future. Malthusian economics is a stagnent model theory. All one has to do is look at a sattalite photograph of the earth to see that most of the earth's surface is unpopulated. Also, there are places in space that are habitable if that becomes necessary.

The popultaion control freaks use all these closed system statistics as a way to justify their selfishness and materialitistic motivations. Who do you think your kidding with all your high sounding caring? You are facsists who wish to control others love of children by limiting population. Hey, maybe you ought to promote only hgomosexual marriage. That would certainly depopulate the earth.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]