Chapter 9. Politics, Population and Resources.
In the previous chapters we have discussed three very simple facts.
1). Many of our world resources are finite and will eventually become depleted.
2). Some of these resources will become exhausted in the near future.
3). The continuously growing population is rapidly polluting the environment.
The steps that have to be taken if we wish our civilization to continue have been shown to be much more complex than they first appear. However when we begin to factor in the politics of our world the problems become even more complicated. The outcome of any particular action is almost impossible to forecast, as now we are dealing with people, attitudes, prejudices, and power which ultimately affect our very lives.
Inevitably as some resources become depleted, the countries that own them will increase the price to the rest of the world. We can hardly complain, for many years we have touted competitive capitalism as the superior method of distributing our resources. We are already seeing the weakness of this philosophy with the oil producing countries that are steadily escalating the cost of this product. We complain about the present cost of gasoline, but in a capitalist society this must be expected to increase as the supplies becomes reduced and at least it begins to give us a hint of what lies in store as the supply starts to become exhausted. We have heard the rhetoric that resulted from the last increase in the cost of oil and these cost increases will continue until the oil supply is exhausted.
Now look ahead another twenty years and consider what is likely to occur as OPEC reduces output and the cost of gasoline in our country reaches $20 per gallon. This may well trigger off a demand for military action as the politicians in the more prosperous countries struggle to retain the support of their people and their votes by maintaining the supply of fuel. We are already seeing the changes in the social conditions in India and China that are resulting in a growing demand for personal transport in those countries and they will obviously enter the competition for the remaining oil supplies. The added growth in the world’s population during the next twenty years will only inflame the situation.
The outcry from the shortage of gasoline will fade into nothing compared to the demands for food as the world population grows and we find that we are unable to meet the demand. As oil becomes scarcer, the cost of producing, storing and transporting our food will rise and as a consequence so will the price of the food. The shortage of oil will also cut back on the use of machines in the fields, which will also inevitably reduce the food supply. The depletion of the aquifers in many regions will limit the water available for irrigation. As the population grows, it will become more difficult to make the choice between producing hydro-electrical power, or providing water for our cities and agriculture. These factors alone will inevitably reduce the amount of food that can be produced in the world.
Now consider the outcry when the peoples of the major food producing nations are asked to limit their demand for food so that the people of some of the other countries can be fed. Already there is famine in many parts of the world. This at present is only happening in comparatively small areas of the Third World and in little known countries. There is little publicity on the plight of these peoples and they are largely ignored, although hundreds of thousands of people die each year from starvation. We have shipped food to some countries when they have requested assistance, but in almost every case this has been from our surplus supplies. No one here in the USA has gone short of food as a consequence of these acts.
However as the world’s population continues to grow, and we steadily use up our non-replaceable resources, it is inevitable that we will eventually reach the point where we can no longer provide enough food for ourselves and keep others supplied as well. This will then raise the extremely difficult question that our leaders will have to resolve, and that each of us will have to face. Do we reduce our own standard of living to feed others in far off countries of the world?
This is one very good reason why the entire question of limiting the world’s population has to come out into the open. This is not a problem that will affect one or two nations. It will affect every person on this planet. We are all responsible for the present situation, we will all have to work together to produce a satisfactory solution. Very soon the effects of the ever-increasing number of people will be even more evident than they are today. We will have to take action now or it will be too late because it takes time for the reduction in the number of births to take effect. We must clearly demonstrate the danger that will soon strike the world from overpopulation, and then we must persuade the people to take action. This will intrude on the private lives of us all but may be necessary to hammer home the fact that our world does not posses limitless resources and that we are using up those that are available at an ever increasing rate. This is where the political attitudes of our leaders will become critical.
If we look at our situation in very simple terms the problem becomes extremely clear. Imagine that we are a small team of six people who have been sent to carry out a long term survey on a small remote island where we will probably be cut off from the rest of the world for several years. We have brought with us sufficient food and water to last for twelve months by which time we must have dug a well to provide drinking water, and planted seed to provide food.
At the end of the first month, two survivors from a sinking ship are washed ashore onto the beach. We feel that by careful use of our resources we can absorb them into our party, and they can assist us by helping to dig the well and plant the fields. A few weeks later another shipwreck drives two more survivors onto the island and this time we find it much more difficult to absorb them into the group, but by cutting back on our rations of food and water we can all survive until the well is completed and the fields are productive. However during the next month a further four survivors arrive and there is no way that they can all live off the food and water available. If we try to provide for them we risk inadequate food and water for us all. Then in our weakened state the well will never be completed or the fields planted and few if any of us will survive. In addition we will have to eat the corn that has been brought for planting in the fields so that no food will be grown. In other words we have limited resources, our food and water, that must keep us alive until we can organize our renewable resources, our well and our growing fields of corn. Each additional person reduces the resources available to the remainder. This is precisely the status in our civilization today, but because of the number of people involved it is difficult to see clearly the effect of another one of two million people. However, each additional child born into this world, reduces the resources that are available to us all. When the population increases by 50%, the resources available to the rest of us are cut in half, and the amount of contamination is doubled.
We have a choice. On the one hand we can recognize that this is a worldwide problem and work together to reduce the world’s population in a controlled and humane manner. In this way we can extend our civilization as long as possible and provide our people with a happy and contented way of life. On the other hand we can do nothing and hope that the world’s population will fall in some ill-defined way. It is hardly likely that this will occur in time to avoid the famine and power shortages that will devastate our way of life. We must begin now to assure total cooperation between countries, otherwise it is inevitable that the struggle between different societies as they try to obtain some of the worlds limited resources for their people will decimate the world’s population.
The ultimate result will be the same, that is a drastic reduction in the number of people in the world. If done in an organized, co-operative manner it need not physically harm anyone. It may require quite dramatic changes in attitudes and beliefs, but the alternatives are too horrible to be accepted. Millions of people dying, not only from starvation, but also from the bombs and weapons of invading and defending forces as they struggle to control the limited resources of food and materials.
So we can see that what at first appears to be a very simple matter of persuading people to minimize their families can quickly become an enormous political problem. The longer we continue to do nothing, the more difficult the problem becomes. If we delay much longer there will not be enough time to take the controlled humane approach. The questions for the politicians will then become difficult and partisan. Continue to retain the support of the voters or ration the supply of power and food to the citizens of the USA so that other countries can take their share of the world’s resources? What happens when there is insufficient food for the world’s entire population? Who decides who will starve?
A far more immediate question relates to the controls that will be necessary if our society is to survive the forthcoming shortages. Gasoline and other oil products appear to be the first to fall under this category. We have for many years promoted and enjoyed a way of life that is based solely on free competition. Indeed such terms as socialism and government control are viewed with a similar hatred to that reserved for dictatorship, fascism and communism. Yet when shortages have occurred in the past, for example with gasoline in WW2, we have not hesitated to install some form of rationing to assure equality for all our people. Similarly we hear the term "socialized medicine" used almost as a term of disgust, yet we eagerly support Medicare and Medicaid. As a nation we have shown compassion for those who are unable to procure the necessities of life for a variety of reasons.
We have also developed a society based on the automobile. Even those applying for government aid because of a low income, are permitted to own their own automobile. Indeed in most places other then the inner cities it is quite impossible to live without a car. Certainly the use of public transport will have to become part of everyone’s daily life, and these services will have to be expanded. All of this will require very tight controls, rationing of gasoline and a change to other forms of energy for those currently using oil and gas to heat their homes.
Similarly it appears that for some time the amount of electricity that can be generated will be limited and some forms of control will be required to assure a supply for personal and essential users. This will see an end to the use of electricity for advertising displays and the bright lights we have been accustomed to in our cities. This shortage will inevitably intrude into our homes and offices and may well eventually call for some form of usage control as we have already see in California.
For these forms of energy we will initially see the market forces of higher cost and limited supply affect our way of life, until the cost becomes such that some form of control will be required and ultimately some form of rationing will extend to all users. With these pressures will come a demand from our citizens to take drastic actions and at this point I believe we will begin to see some of the actions necessary to reduce our population to a point where we can all enjoy a reasonable way of life. This pressure will also recognize that we have to rely solely on our renewable resources, and we will begin to work more effectively on improving our electrical supply from such sources as wind, solar, tidal and geo-thermal sources. Whether this will allow a free use of electricity will hinge very much on the number of consumers and therefore the degree to which our world population is reduced.
Of course with a reduction in population it will once again be possible for the hardy souls among us to retire to the wilderness and the old self-reliant way of life. However with the reduction and probable elimination of personal mechanical transport, this will truly become a way of living of two hundred years ago, with little or no contact with any but immediate neighbors. However the potential of the computer and other communication systems will make the isolation much less of a hardship.