Monday, June 9, 2014

Bye, Bye, Baby?

P. J. O'Rourke has this great line, about how "population control" gives liberals a chance to be racist without owning up to it.

The reason is that the number of "white" (whatever that means; it is a problem to define, and rightly so) people is either constant or declining.  That population is controlled already.

The "problem," if there is one, is that the number of brown and yellow people (again, with the problems of saying what that even means) is increasing.  As O'Rourke puts it, "Just enough of me, way too many of you!"

Here's my actual question:  is it a problem that women are not having babies?  Is the problem the opposite of population "control"?

Two things:  First, the "choice" to have babies is, for many women, not a choice at all.  The expectations of society, and the demands of "their" men (which is like saying "my rapist," owning something you would love to get rid of!), are the things causing the babies.  Women need to be able to make voluntary informed choices.  The problem is that these choices, either the having or the not having of babies, have some pretty big external impacts in the aggregate.

Second, my "solution" is to change the question.  People are assets, not liabilities.  If people get to make euvoluntary choices, the world is a better place for all of us.  Especially if there are more of us to have the world be a better place for.  So, the problem is not controlling the population, but giving people better choices and more options to find ways to cooperate voluntarily.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Do you have suggestions on where we could find more examples of this phenomenon?