CHAPTER XII

MALTHUS AND POPULATION CONCEPTS

A unique and distinctive trend in social thought with important

sociological implications developed in the closing years of the

eighteenth century, namely, Malthusian thought regarding population.

Malthusianism, however, was preceded by the ideas of William Godwin

and Adam Smith. In 1775, Adam Smith had stated that “every species

of animals naturally multiplies in proportion to the means of their

subsistence, and no species can ever multiply beyond it.”[XII-1]

Scanty subsistence, however, destroys a large percentage of offspring.

Inasmuch as men, like all other animals, multiply naturally in

proportion to the means of their subsistence, food is always, more

or less, in demand; and food, or the cost of living, regulates

population.[XII-2] City people must depend upon the country for their

subsistence, whereas seaport towns can command food resources from all

parts of the earth.

The population ideas of William Godwin (1756–1836) were the immediate

stimuli which set Malthus at work. In 1793, Godwin’s _Enquiry

Concerning Justice_ was published. Godwin elaborated several radical

social ideas of the French Physiocratic philosophers. He declared

that human misery is caused by coercive institutions. Government,

he asserted, is an evil and should be abolished. He urged also the

abolition of strict marriage relations, although he personally

acquiesced in the custom and in his last days he commended marriage.

He thought that no social group should be larger than a parish, and

that there should be an equal distribution of property. Godwin thus

carried the doctrine of natural rights to the verge of anarchy and

licentiousness. His ideas furnished a basis for the nineteenth century

experiments in communism. But what is more important, Godwin’s ideas

regarding the reconstruction of society stimulated Thomas Malthus,

who developed what is commonly known as the Malthusian doctrine of

population.

In 1798, under an assumed name, Thomas Robert Malthus (1766–1834)

offered to the world the first carefully collected and elaborated body

of data, dealing with what he called _the_ social problem, namely:

What is the underlying cause of human unhappiness? This study may be

counted, in a sense, the beginning of modern sociological study. Early

in life Malthus showed an interest in social questions. Godwin’s ideas

had centered Malthus’ attention on population. Malthus’ well-known

treatise entitled, _An Essay on the Principle of Population as it

Affects the Future Improvement of Society_, undertook two important

tasks: (1) To investigate the causes that have impeded the progress of

mankind toward happiness, and (2) to examine probabilities of a total

or partial removal of these causes.[XII-3]

Among both plants and animals there is a constant tendency to reproduce

numerically beyond the subsistence level. Wherever there is liberty,

this power of increase blindly asserts itself. Afterwards, a lack of

nourishment and of room represses the superabundant numbers.[XII-4]

It appears, therefore, that the ultimate check to population is lack

of food, due to the fact that population increases faster than food

supply. Nature, in other words, sets a harsher law over the increase

of subsistence than she does over the birth rate. Man fails to take

cognizance of this law and brings untold misery upon himself. The lower

economic classes are the chief victims, and the giants of poverty

and pauperism rule over whole sections of human population. Malthus

considers the question of population the fundamental social problem.

Since population outruns food supply, dire human consequences

naturally follow. Food supply, as a check upon population, operates

harshly; it is but representative of an entire series of rigorous

natural, or positive, checks upon population. In this list there are

unwholesome occupations; forms of severe labor; extreme poverty;

damp and wretched housing conditions; diseases, epidemics, plagues,

poor nursing; intestine commotion, martial law, civil war; wars of

all forms; excesses of all kinds.[XII-5] These positive checks upon

population are the results of two main causes, namely, vice and misery.

As a result of the operation of these factors, population is being

continually cut down and kept near the mere subsistence plane.

Malthus pointed out another check upon population, the preventive.

The fear of falling into poverty causes many young people to postpone

marriage until they can safely marry--economically. This check so

far as voluntary is peculiar to man and, to the extent that it is

not followed by irregular sex gratification, is prudential. The

actual pressure of population upon food supply, or the fear of this

impingement, prevents people from marrying earlier than they do and

from reproducing their kind faster than they would do otherwise. This

pressure, or the fear of it, cuts down the marriage rate in times of

economic depression. But let prosperity come and the marriage rate

leaps upward, especially among the poorer classes.

The positive and preventive checks upon population hold a definite

relation to each other. “In every country where the whole of the

procreative power cannot be called into action, the preventive and the

positive checks must vary inversely as each other.”[XII-6] That is to

say, when positive checks, such as famine and war, slay large numbers

of people, moral restraint is diminished and the population numbers

rapidly increase. When the preventive check expresses itself strongly,

the population is kept down numerically, and positive checks, such as

famine or even war, are defeated.

Malthus attempted to establish three propositions:

(1) The limitation of population by the restriction of the means of

subsistence.

(2) The invariable increase of population whenever the means of

subsistence increase, unless prevented by powerful checks.

(3) The factors which keep population on a level with the means of

subsistence are all resolvable into three: moral restraint, vice, and

misery.[XII-7]

No one can gainsay the importance or the seriousness of the problem of

population. Plato wrestled with it, and urged that procreation when it

goes on too fast or too slow should be regulated by the state--through

a proper distribution of marks of ignominy or of honor. The number of

marriages should be determined by the magistrates.

Aristotle suggested that the ages of marriage for both sexes should be

regulated; he even advocated the regulation of the number of children

for each marriage. Additional children should be aborted.

Malthus, however, was wiser than either Plato or Aristotle, for he

observed that the cause which has the most lasting effect in improving

the condition of the poorer classes is the conduct and prudence of

the individuals themselves.[XII-8] Malthus asserted that it is in the

power of each individual to avoid all the evil consequences to himself

and society which result from the principle of population, “by the

practice of a virtue clearly dictated to him by the light of nature and

expressly enjoined in revealed religion.”[XII-9]

Malthus demonstrated clearly the weakness of liberal poor-laws. Give

more food to the poor, and they will produce more children, and suffer

more misery. Poor-laws increase the numbers of children of the poor,

and hence increase the amount of misery. Both private benevolence and

poor-laws increase the number of marriages and of children.[XII-10]

Education is the solution which Malthus demanded.[XII-11] Educate the

poor to postpone marriage, to keep the birth rate down, and to practice

economic thrift. To a great extent education will secure the operation

of the prudential check upon population. The science of moral and

political philosophy should not be confined within such narrow limits

that it is unable to overcome in practical ways the obstacles to human

happiness which arise from the law of population.[XII-12]

There are factors in the population situation which did not exist

at the time of Malthus, or which he did not see. Today there are

additional preventive checks upon population, for example, the rise

of democracy in the family whereby the wife and mother no longer

is dominated by the husband and father, but has a voice of her own

regarding domestic matters, such as the number of children. Closely

related to this tendency is the feminist movement, or woman’s rights

movement, whereby women are demanding that they not be confined to

the sphere of bearing and rearing children. Increasing intelligence

and foresight has served as a powerful preventive check upon

population. The current emphasis upon luxury is inimical to the birth

rate. A higher economic status almost uniformly cuts down the birth

rate. Within the last score of years the new science of eugenics

has attracted widespread attention. Eugenics stresses quality of

population. It would effect a decrease in the numbers of children

born among the lower classes, among the poorer stocks, and prevent

procreation among the mentally deficient. It would increase the birth

rate among the cultured and the high grade stocks.

Malthus appreciated the dependence of urban population upon rural

districts, but he could not foresee the degree to which cities would

grow in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. The relative decrease

of agricultural labor and the proportional increase in non-agricultural

labor has thrown a burden upon the food supply which even Malthus could

not forecast.

On the other hand, Malthus did not realize the extent to which new

countries such as the United States, Canada, Australia, Argentina would

contribute to the world’s means of subsistence. He could not predict

the way in which invention would be applied in solving agricultural

problems, and how today one man with improved machinery and intensive

methods can produce a hundred ears of corn where one was produced a

century ago. Nevertheless, the “new country” argument against Malthus’

principle of population is ultimately fallacious, for new countries

soon become old, the supply of new countries becomes exhausted, and

there is even a limit to soil productiveness. The very pressure of

population against means of subsistence is, however, a cause of

inventiveness, so that unanticipated increases in food supply may occur

at any time.

Socialism has criticized Malthus severely. Socialism holds that at

a given time the food supply is sufficient to meet human needs but

that it is poorly or unjustly distributed. With just distribution of

the returns from industry, food supply would not impinge strongly on

population. But socialism might greatly endanger the prudential check

on population, and hence result in an increased birth rate; which in

turn would more than balance any release from human misery that a just

distribution of the returns from industry would effect.

Another point which Malthus did not observe is that the increase in

technical skill which comes with vocational education is overcome by

the tendency of the world’s population to overtake the world’s food

productiveness. With increase in population, the price of land rises,

the rent for land increases, the cost of living mounts upward, and the

purchasing power of the dollar, or its equivalent, declines.

Some of the followers of Malthus have advocated birth control as an

artificial means of regulating population. Birth control prevents by

physical means the birth of children. It is a useful weapon against

sexually brutal husbands. It does not provide for self control or moral

control of the sexual impulses. It encourages rather than controls

gratification of the sexual desires. By it a gain is made in protecting

helpless women and in cutting down the birth rate among the lower moral

classes, whether wealthy or poor, but the gain is more than lost by the

opportunity which birth control gives to the irregular gratification of

sexual impulses and by the resultant weakening of moral fibre.

Thomas N. Carver, whose work will be referred to again in subsequent

chapters, has developed an interesting population theory which is

partly Malthusian.[XII-13] The increase in population from both

immigration sources and the birth rate should be cut down, thereby

decreasing the percentage of unskilled labor. Further, persons should

be trained out of the unskilled group into the skilled group and then

into the _entrepreneur_ class. Thus, by greatly decreasing the number

of unskilled laborers and by increasing the number of entrepreneurs,

wages will advance and profits will be increasingly subdivided. The

poor will become well-to-do, and poverty as it is now known will

tend to disappear. This theory underestimates the importance of

psychological motives and of social attitudes under a system where a

marked degree of competition is encouraged.

In conclusion, it may be stated that the principle of population as

given by Malthus is fundamental to an understanding of the problems

of social progress.[XII-14] There is a positive relation between

population and means of subsistence. Positive and preventive checks

upon population are continually at work. Moral restraint and self

control, based on scientifically devised human laws, create a better

moral fibre than birth control. The quality of personality is far more

important than mere numbers of population. The struggle for quality in

personality must be supplemented by justice in industrial and social

processes before the population problem can be solved.

A history of social thought · 第 12 / 28 章