The one child policy

[Revy]

What are your thoughts on this?

China must be the only country to implement this, though I read that Vietnam used to have a two-child policy and the Philippines recently discussed and debated a two-child policy as well.

Interestingly, the policy was introduced six years after the release of Soylent Green, a film taking place in 2022 in an overpopulated world with little resources. It seems the '70s may have had a lot of this rhetoric about overpopulation...much more so than now.

The policy reportedly has the backing of most Chinese, 76% from a 2008 poll. And population growth in China has slowed, though it's unclear whether that's due in large part to the policy or some other factor. But is it worth it? Or is it a huge unnecessary attack on civil liberties?

[Muzk]

I think it's a plus, actually... china is polluted as hell, as well as overpopulated to the limit

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

The one wrinkle I've always heard about the one-child policy is the Chinese cultural proclivity for favouring sons over daughters. How has this affected the demographics of China? I've also heard horror stories about baby girls being abandoned (to put it delicately) - how common an occurance is this sort of thing?

Of course, even if there is a demographic skew and baby girls are discarded like sweet wrappers, it would be worth it if the alternative of allowing overpopulation would have been worse than the current situation.

[LOLseph Stalin]

I would say the One-Child policy has its goods and bads. Sure, it helps for population control since China seems to suffer from severe over-population. However, as NoXion mentioned there is indeed a favouring of boys over girls. As part of traditional Chinese culture there has been a favour of boys for use as soldiers, etc, but in today's China I don't really think that's a huge concern. At least the Chinese government is trying to enforce laws banning the abandonment of baby girls and infanticide. This should definitely continue if they're going to have such a policy.

[Radical]

Currently in the Western area I feel it could also be a good idea to only allow couples to reproduce one child. If couples want to have more than one child they should be only allowed to adopt from the third world. Where children are starving to death everyday.

I feel reproduction in this day an age is selfish, as you could be saving the life of a child instead of bringing another in.

[amandevsingh]

Population should remain reasonably constant, they no longer have enough population to maintain their infrastructure. This will only get worse as boy to girl ration is very messed up!!

[Misanthrope]

What happened to "women should have control of their bodies"?

[reddevil]

Yes, it is unfortunate that millions of mothers encountered heartbreak. But what if it wasn't enforced. The world, and China in particular, is far too overcrowded already.

[Abc]

What happened to "women should have control of their bodies"?
because once the child comes out its not part of there bodies, and having 9 kids who you cant feed because you decided to have sex with out thinking about the consquences is cruel and selfish

[Misanthrope]

because once the child comes out its not part of there bodies, and having 9 kids who you cant feed because you decided to have sex with out thinking about the consquences is cruel and selfish

Way to completely stereotype every women that chooses to have more than one child.

"because once the child comes out its not part of there bodies,"

So any crime committed against that child is justified in what way?

Having control of your body means having control of the natural abilities your body performs.

an anarchist supporting population control enforced by an authoritarian state..:laugh:

[Abc]

Way to completely stereotype every women that chooses to have more than one child.
i'm not stereotyping every women that chooses to have more than one child i'm stereotyping every woman who have 9 kids knowing they can not take care of them


So any crime committed against that child is justified in what way? what are you talking about?


Having control of your body means having control of the natural abilities your body performs.Yes but that does not mean its ok to have as many children as you want without thinking first

an anarchist supporting population control enforced by an authoritarian state..:laugh:who said i support population control enforced by an authoritarian state, i belive in a anarchy there sould be sex education, and free and easy access to abortion, birth control, and condoms this would have worked much better but it require much more money then chinas one-child policy but the chinese goverment would rather spend the money on other stuff, like building factories to make crap for the U.S., invading tibet, and buying weapons

[RotStern]

It is good as many have mentioned. China is very overpopulated.
I would think having 1 child and giving it a good quality life is better to have 2 and not be able to.
In China there seems to be an ideology of some sort that a family must produce an heir to their name. Or so I have been told.
I am guessing a possible solution to this would be simply for more men to adopt their female counterpart's last name?

[Vanguard1917]

China seems to suffer from severe over-population


Myth. China has a lower population density than various European countries, including Switzerland, Italy, Germany, the UK, Belgium, and the Netherlands.

Countries like China and India get all the attention from Western Malthusians because those countries are made up of poor brown and 'oriental' people who we apparently need less of, and not enlightened white Westerners. When was the last time you heard Western politicians, NGOs and billionaires (http://www.revleft.com/vb/leading-us-billionaires-t109788/index.html?t=109788) complain that there are too many people in Belgium?

But China is not and never has been 'overpopulated'.

[Vanguard1917]

i'm not stereotyping every women that chooses to have more than one child i'm stereotyping every woman who have 9 kids knowing they can not take care of them


So it's poor people's own fault that they can't provide the best for their children? What a deplorable and reactionary assumption to make.



i belive in a anarchy there sould be sex education, and free and easy access to abortion, birth control, and condoms


Yes, and what about free childcare for all working parents, maternity and paternity leave on full pay, and other measures to help women who choose to have children?

Or do you only support policies to 'help' women who don't want kids? If so, that's not supporting women's freedom to choose. It's cynically exploiting the politics of women's liberty in order to provide justification for your real goal, i.e. population reduction.

[Pawn Power]

I don't think the state should have the power to implement a policy to limit an individuals choice to give birth, and moreover, I don't think it is necessary in regards to population control, which I do think is necessary (in general). It has been established through years of research the the determinant factor in reducing the birth rate comes from education (both sexual education and education in general). So, I think the appropriate position to take is not a approval of state authority but to advocate for more education to all people.

[jake williams]

TC totally demolished the idea that the right not to have a child is equivalent to the right to have a child awhile ago when a similar topic arose. Yes, a lot of the rhetoric in the West about overpopulation is basically racist, and yes, there are the inevitable problems with implementation, especially on such a large scale. But relative overpopulation is something that any society should be concerned about.

[Pawn Power]

TC totally demolished the idea that the right not to have a child is equivalent to the right to have a child awhile ago when a similar topic arose. Yes, a lot of the rhetoric in the West about overpopulation is basically racist, and yes, there are the inevitable problems with implementation, especially on such a large scale. But relative overpopulation is something that any society should be concerned about.

link?

To be sure there needs to be a distinction between the needs and desires of a society and the power of a state.

[jake williams]

link?

To be sure there needs to be a distinction between the needs and desires of a society and the power of a state.
It's not extensive, but I think it's correct:

The decision to have a child, unlike a decision not to have a child, is not strictly the exclusive business of the mother and her alone...because the community has to contribute to taking care of that child. Ending a pregnancy is something done within the confines of one's own body, having a child is the opposite, its bringing someone into the world and that someone creates a moral obligation to take care of him or her.

Having said that, given the practical limits of the number of children someone can have, and the fact that people on average in advanced economies will want no more than two children, there is no justification for trying to regulate the number of children people have.

Moreover, the 'public policy' on whether the birth to death ratio should be positive, equal, or negative, is something that people can decide collectively by 'voting with their feet' so to speak: if people reproduce at above replacement level thats a decision that people value more than two children more than avoiding the negative consequences doing so, vice versa if they decide on average to have less than two children. Given this, while on an abstract level interests other than the mother's are at stake when having a child, on a practical level the only democratic and egalitarian way of deciding how to regulate the number of children people have is through their own self-regulation.

[Abc]

So it's poor people's own fault that they can't provide the best for their children? What a deplorable and reactionary assumption to make.
you missed my point, i'm talking about if you KNOW your poor and you still have 10 kids

Yes, and what about free childcare for all working parents, maternity and paternity leave on full pay, and other measures to help women who choose to have children?

i support those things too

Or do you only support policies to 'help' women who don't want kids? If so, that's not supporting women's freedom to choose. It's cynically exploiting the politics of women's liberty in order to provide justification for your real goal, i.e. population reduction.
So nothing sould be done thats what your saying, No sex education, No free abortion nothing if a poor family wants to have 20 kids who will all starve to death thats fine!

[Misanthrope]

i'm not stereotyping every women that chooses to have more than one child i'm stereotyping every woman who have 9 kids knowing they can not take care of them

What is with the exact number of nine? Show me a source where there is a women who had exactly nine children in China and continued to have custody of those nine children.



what are you talking about?


What do you think a state that violates numerous human rights does with a child that is considered "illegal". Abandonment, neglect, infanticide.



Yes but that does not mean its ok to have as many children as you want without thinking first


who said i support population control enforced by an authoritarian state, i belive in a anarchy there sould be sex education, and free and easy access to abortion, birth control, and condoms this would have worked much better but it require much more money then chinas one-child policy but the chinese goverment would rather spend the money on other stuff, like building factories to make crap for the U.S., invading tibet, and buying weapons

Well this is a thread about China's One Child Policy and you implied you were in favor of it because apparently there are Chinese women running around with their legs open and having exactly nine babies and then not taking care of them.



chinese goverment would rather spend the money on other stuff, like building factories to make crap for the U.S., invading tibet, and buying weapons

Invading Tibet... :laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

[Abc]

Ok i think there may have been a mistanding, i DONT support chinas one child policy, i think there are better ways of controling the population, becuase there is such a thing as over population

[amandevsingh]

What is with the exact number of nine? Show me a source where there is a women who had exactly nine children in China and continued to have custody of those nine children.

That was meant before the one child policy.

I agree with Billy Mays point. If you are poor you have to make special considerations based on your circumstance.

[Misanthrope]

That was meant before the one child policy.

I agree with Billy Mays point. If you are poor you have to make special considerations based on your circumstance.

That is irrelevant to the whole situation. These hypothetical "poor" aka working class women don't have the ability to "make special considerations based on their circumstances". This whole argument you and Billy Mays are presenting is a made up situation that has no basis in reality let alone the topic at hand.

[SoupIsGoodFood]

Anyone advocating forced abortions is no longer allowed to call themselves pro choice or feminists. And I think if we're gonna restrict people who want abortion to be illegal on the grounds that it's sexist to tell women what to do with their bodies, we should restrict people who want to force women to have abortions if they get pregnant a second time. I don't actually advocate the restriction of anyone, I'm just sayin. As Jello Biafra said, for every restriction, you create an underground.

[Radical]

Way to completely stereotype every women that chooses to have more than one child.

"because once the child comes out its not part of there bodies,"

So any crime committed against that child is justified in what way?

Having control of your body means having control of the natural abilities your body performs.

an anarchist supporting population control enforced by an authoritarian state..:laugh:

All Revolutionaries are Authoritarian.

Revolution is the most Authoritarian thing because your forcing a Revolution upon somebody.

[SoupIsGoodFood]

All Revolutionaries are Authoritarian.

Revolution is the most Authoritarian thing because your forcing a Revolution upon somebody.

If not being Authoritarian makes me not a revolutionary, then so be it. I would die for my beliefs, and "Revolutionary" is just a fucking word anyways. I'll stick by me beliefs no matter what label you put on them.

[Atrus]

As I understand it, the problem of "overpopulation" in China is a social/economic problem, not a physical one?
China's Xinjiang region [the sovereignty debate put aside for the moment] in one of the most sparesly populated areas in the world, being the size of Western Europe and only have 19 million inhabitants.
I admit that my understanding of the effects of large populations on economy is somewhat rudimentary, but surely there are methods to deal with the effects without forcibly limiting birth numbers?
There is space for many more people in China, [even if this meant some degree of relocation obviously using an incentive program or something similar, NOT force, if this is necessary] and the people know there is a need to limit birth numbers through education, they can be trusted not to have large families.
I believe the problem initially was when china was rebuilding from one war or another, they were encouraged to reproduce a lot to make China a great nation, and this got out of hand. Surely now the society's whole perspective has changed, so if they lift this policy, the population won't just explode.
Excuse me for rambling, to summarise my point, there seems to be very little argument left [if there ever was any, I'm not really sure] for any sort of birth policy, without even looking at the disgusting lack of morals behind it, and the terrible things it forces people to do.

[Radical]

If not being Authoritarian makes me not a revolutionary, then so be it. I would die for my beliefs, and "Revolutionary" is just a fucking word anyways. I'll stick by me beliefs no matter what label you put on them.

A revolutionary is somebody that advocates revolution. Therefore through them advocating revolution they also become Authoritarian.

[SoupIsGoodFood]

A revolutionary is somebody that advocates revolution. Therefore through them advocating revolution they also become Authoritarian.

I advocate revolution against capitalist and Authoritarian regimes. I am not Authoritarian because I also advocate freedom of speech, freedom of choice, and freedom of religion, and because I support non violent tactics before violent tactics. I'm not sure what that makes me, and I don't really care.

[amandevsingh]

That is irrelevant to the whole situation. These hypothetical "poor" aka working class women don't have the ability to "make special considerations based on their circumstances". This whole argument you and Billy Mays are presenting is a made up situation that has no basis in reality let alone the topic at hand.

They have the ability to choose not have 10 kids, which would obviously put them (and the kids) at a disadvantage. We should have enough self-control not to need a policy to regulate the birth children.

[WhitemageofDOOM]

Ok i think there may have been a mistanding, i DONT support chinas one child policy, i think there are better ways of controling the population, becuase there is such a thing as over population

Not really, only once in the history of humanity has overpopulation been a problem. Which was just before the development of agriculture. after we invented civilization we haven't had any concerns with insufficient resources to support our population, only poor division of resources.

Malthusian argument always boils down to classism, and in it's modern form adds racism to the mix.

[ZeroNowhere]

All Revolutionaries are Authoritarian.

Revolution is the most Authoritarian thing because your forcing a Revolution upon somebody.Congratulations, you just missed the point.

[Misanthrope]

All Revolutionaries are Authoritarian.

Revolution is the most Authoritarian thing because your forcing a Revolution upon somebody.

A change in fundamental institutions is authoritarian in what way? A revolution is a war of self defense.

[Radical]

A change in fundamental institutions is authoritarian in what way? A revolution is a war of self defense.


Congratulations, you just missed the point.


Get out of your fanatasy lands.

"A revolution is certainly the most authoritarian thing there is; it is the act whereby one part of the population imposes its will upon the other part by means of rifles, bayonets and cannon — authoritarian means, if such there be at all; and if the victorious party does not want to have fought in vain, it must maintain this rule by means of the terror which its arms inspire in the reactionists. Would the Paris Commune have lasted a single day if it had not made use of this authority of the armed people against the bourgeois? Should we not, on the contrary, reproach it for not having used it freely enough?" - Friedrich Engels

"
Why do the anti-authoritarians not confine themselves to crying out against political authority, the state? All Socialists are agreed that the political state, and with it political authority, will disappear as a result of the coming social revolution, that is, that public functions will lose their political character and will be transformed into the simple administrative functions of watching over the true interests of society. But the anti-authoritarians demand that the political state be abolished at one stroke, even before the social conditions that gave birth to it have been destroyed. They demand that the first act of the social revolution shall be the abolition of authority. Have these gentlemen ever seen a revolution? A revolution is certainly the most authoritarian thing there is; it is the act whereby one part of the population imposes its will upon the other part by means of rifles, bayonets and cannon — authoritarian means, if such there be at all; and if the victorious party does not want to have fought in vain, it must maintain this rule by means of the terror which its arms inspire in the reactionists. Would the Paris Commune have lasted a single day if it had not made use of this authority of the armed people against the bourgeois? Should we not, on the contrary, reproach it for not having used it freely enough?
Therefore, either one of two things: either the anti-authoritarians don't know what they're talking about, in which case they are creating nothing but confusion; or they do know, and in that case they are betraying the movement of the proletariat. In either case they serve the reaction."


Thank you, I rest my case.

PS; Friedrich Engels just called you Anti-proletariat

[Misanthrope]

Authoritarian: of, relating to, or favoring a concentration of power in a leader or an elite not responsible to the people.

A proletariat revolution is favoring a concentration of power in themselves (the majority of society) and are fighting against the authoritarians, the bourgeois.

Thank you, I rest my case.

PS; fuck you internet tough guy

[Coggeh]

The users who have rummaged on about the problem of 'overcrowding' and 'overpopulation' in China are posing reactionary arguments without looking at any of the evidence.

The problem isn't overpopulation , their is a relative overcrowding in some areas in China but this is due in part to Mao's policy of household registration which discriminated people based on place of birth . People were only allowed to work where they were born . If ever someone left their place of birth they would lose all benefits such as health care etc . By 1978 rural incomes were far below that of urban ones and this is when liberalization began in allowing the free migration of peasants to work in urban areas . Because the pay ratio of urban to rural worker was 2.57 :1, the proportion of China’s urban population increased from 18 percent in 1978 to 43.9 percent in 2006.

This has caused a problem of overcrowding in many cities across china such as Anhui, Jiangxi, Henan, Hubei, Hunan, Guangxi, Chongqing, Sichuan, and Guizhou but the the idea of controlling population is not the solution .The problem of migration policies by the Chinese bureauacracy and the poor planning by the maoist regime before that is certainly to blame ,because of the poor planning and restrictions during mao's era and because of the Chinese bureaucracies drive for neo-liberal reforms their is a huge lack of any structure or stablity for workers and peasants in China whatsoever .In 1989, there were already about 30 million migrant workers in China. In 1993, the number increased to 62 million and by the end of 2006 to 131.8 million.In Zhejiang about one third of the total population are migrant workers, while in Shenzhen, which grew from a small town in the late 1970s to become a an overcrowded dense urbanised city three decades later, 12 million of the total 14 million population are migrant workers.

Again it must be stressed it is not a problem of migration or free movement of labour , but of wreckless planning during the maoist era and the push for privatisation and profit in the new market era.

^For example: because of the hokou system that remains in china (Link below) migrants are not given access to health care , education or many basic rights because it is not their place of birth .Migrants must pay for medical care which has increased tenfold in since 1990 which on wages barely enough to clothe and feed themselves is far out of reach of the majority of migrant workers .This creates huge poverty and social degradation , thus creating the idea that theirs 'too many people'.:rolleyes:

In China their is an illusion of overpopulation , this is only so because of the overcrowding due to the poor planning and the lack of any rights , education and funding for rural and urban towns and cities .

The real solution to this problem is to create a new system , based on democratic workers planning of society and its needs . A political revolution to overthrow the tyrant bureacracy and to do away with capitalist reforms which far from the capitalist myth that companies will improve the lives of workers and improve their rights are actually making it worse for example: 100,000 workers are killed in accidents-due to being overworked, underpaid and the lack of any enforcement of health and safety measures whatsoever- everyyear and just 5% of them are workers for state industry.This is more than the amount of people killed in the Sichaun earthquake I might also add .

Also: People should read vanguard's 1917 post which throws out the bourgeois myth that theres too many people for such an area in China.

http://home.wangjianshuo.com/archives/20060610_hukou_system_in_china.htm (General Idea of it based on personal account)

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

In China their is an illusion of overpopulation , this is only so because of the overcrowding due to the poor planning and the lack of any rights , education and funding for rural and urban towns and cities.

So I take it this is the essence of the problem? Interesting. I'm somewhat surprised that the official Chinese state line (That overpopulation is the problem) hasn't been challenged more, even by its ideological enemies.

[Coggeh]

So I take it this is the essence of the problem? Interesting. I'm somewhat surprised that the official Chinese state line (That overpopulation is the problem) hasn't been challenged more, even by its ideological enemies.
Because it serves the bureaucracy and western companies pretty well in the profit making department to say its overpopulation without tackling the real issues on the ground . Its easier to limit families from having more than 1 child than it is to create a society where people aren't punished for having 2 or more children.

I do not know why western bourgeois democracies don't challenge it to the amount i'd expect but that is a non-issue in reality , many chinese labour rights groups have brought it up as have many leftist organisations .Maybe its because China have become a huge trading power for most of them , the same way abuses in Saudi Arabia simply go unnoticed by the US .

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

The thing is, I've at least come across the occasional mainstream media article reporting on human rights abuses in Saudi Arabia, but until recently I've not come across any such challenges to the idea that China is overpopulated. It is most curious.

[Coggeh]

The thing is, I've at least come across the occasional mainstream media article reporting on human rights abuses in Saudi Arabia, but until recently I've not come across any such challenges to the idea that China is overpopulated. It is most curious.
Maybe because the overpopulation myth is so widely accepted in mainstream society ?

I can't see an immediate reason why they wouldn't it is indeed curious.


But to be honest whether or not the bourgeois press choose to report the facts or not doesn't change them and/or the reasons for it.

[Revy]

I do not apologize if you think my thread is a joke, Coggeh.

For the record, I do not support the one-child policy nor do I think overpopulation is a real issue. I was interested in opening up debate about the idea of reversing the policy.

[Coggeh]

I do not apologize if you think my thread is a joke, Coggeh.

For the record, I do not support the one-child policy nor do I think overpopulation is a real issue. I was interested in opening up debate about the idea of reversing the policy.
I didn't mean the OP , I was referring to the responses by some users.I agree its important to discuss things like this . I'm sorry if thats what it sounded like too you . I'll edit my post.

My apologies.

[Revy]

I didn't mean the OP , I was referring to the responses by some users.I agree its important to discuss things like this . I'm sorry if thats what it sounded like too you . I'll edit my post.

My apologies.

Oh. Well then, sorry for the misunderstanding.:)

[Comrade Akai]

I believe it should be the parents' choice to decide how many children they have. I understand that overpopulation is a problem, but I'm certain there are more benevolent ways to combat it.

[ev]

This is bullshit, over population is not a problem, everyone in the world can fit into the state of Texas quite comfortably..

Everyone has the right to have children, the one child policy is ridiculous and a crude solution to the problems that arise from capitalism and poor social organization!

I'm shocked that there are so many "leftists" advocating and supporting this notion of a "one child policy" in china, what china needs is communism, anarchism or a socioeconomic system which will meet the needs of the population.

- IN FACT - why don't we just solve global warming with a universal "one child policy" ? :rolleyes:

[Comrade Akai]

Could someone please explain to me how overpopulation is not a problem? I don't support the one-child policy but I'd just like to know.

[ev]

Could someone please explain to me how overpopulation is not a problem? I don't support the one-child policy but I'd just like to know.

It becomes a problem when the environment can't accommodate an increase in population. However, in this case it is social organization which is the problem.

The state struggles to support such a high population because it isn't economical or profitable within the capitalist framework (or state capitalist for that matter).

The thing is, there doesn't need to be an "overpopulation problem" - other methods of social & economic organization would remedy this situation. e.g. anarchism

[Comrade Akai]

It becomes a problem when the environment can't accommodate an increase in population. However, in this case it is social organization which is the problem.

The state struggles to support such a high population because it isn't economical or profitable within the capitalist framework (or state capitalist for that matter).

The thing is, there doesn't need to be an "overpopulation problem" - other methods of social & economic organization would remedy this situation. e.g. anarchism
Thanks, I appreciate it.

I can see how anarchism would work there.

[ZeroNowhere]

PS; Friedrich Engels just called you Anti-proletariatI'm anti-proletariat, so was he. After all, he wished for the abolition of the proletariat, surely that is anti-proletariat if anything is?

Hey, two can play at this game.

Edit: Also, this seems to be a somewhat off-topic exchange.

[Vanguard1917]

I'm anti-proletariat, so was he. After all, he wished for the abolition of the proletariat, surely that is anti-proletariat if anything is?

Hey, two can play at this game.

Lol, well played. :cool:

[pastradamus]

For all those who think Overpopulation measures in China are justified, than type "china orphanages" into Youtube and look at what the true effects of Overpopulation programme's are.

These are numerous reasons why this policy is so despairingly ridiculous.

One of the big reasons is that over crowding in China is generally not that big a deal when one take's into account that there are higher population densities in Italy, Belgium, South Korea, Holland, Japan, Vietnam, Germany, Switzerland, Nigeria and the UK. The concept of the overcrowding Programme is more an Issue of possible FUTURE population growth with the Chinese. But what about the future population growth of any country? One of the aspects of such is that Population, generally grows. Especially when a poor society goes through a spell of comparitively good economic climes.

I think the sickest aspect of the Overpopulation policies is this policy of forcing a parent to give up their children, especially when it will save the state money not to take the child and the parents money in the legal fee's involved in their "mistake".

As already mentioned in a good post. I find it even more despicable when they totally disrespect the Woman's right to conceive. That is to say they (the PRC) think multiple child birth is something which is always planned and is a crime.

[RedStarOverChina]

What happened to "women should have control of their bodies"?
The problem with that is in China (as well as in other shitty countries) men tend to force their wives to have loads and loads of children, often for the purpose of obtaining a son. When they introduced this policy in China, they did have this in mind. In practice, this did protect many women from their husbands as well.

There's nothing wrong with population control itself, IMO.

However, the so-called "One Child Policy" (the term itself is a Western invention) is not a single policy, it has many laws attached to it, ones that are pretty messed up---such as restrictions on adopting a child. That's one of the main reasion why Chinese orphanages are full of unwanted girls.

The population control policies should continue. But it should be reformed.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

It strikes me as counter-intuitive to restrict adoption if one is seeking to limit population growth - if anything in such a situation, adoption should be encouraged over natural birth.

[Coggeh]

There's nothing wrong with population control itself, IMO.


There is alot wrong with population control . Its a bourgeois way of limiting populations because their system cannot provide properly for the masses . It shows the absolute fallacy that is the free market system and their workings into trying to hide that fallacy by simply blaming the amount of people .

We see this with people such as bill gates who is now on a personal quest to solve 'the problem of over-population':rolleyes:

[RedStarOverChina]

It strikes me as counter-intuitive to restrict adoption if one is seeking to limit population growth - if anything in such a situation, adoption should be encouraged over natural birth.
Exactly my point.

In practice, however, it would encourage couples to give birth and try to pass it off as an adoption. They also fear human-trafficking as result of this. There are a million things that could go wrong, because especially in rurual areas, the Confucianist dogma of "continuing your familyline" is big. People will go ridiculously far just to have an "heir".

I know someone who's been trying to adopt a girl and the local Family Planning officials were going at him like flies because he already had a son. Often he had to hide his adopted daughter in the closet until the officials left.

The law states that parents can only adopt if they do not already have a child. Exceptions will be made if they adopt disabled children.

Much of the laws regarding family planning are quite infantile and needs to be massively reformed.


There is alot wrong with population control . Its a bourgeois way of limiting populations because their system cannot provide properly for the masses .


Somewhat true. This year, China could only provide half the people newly entering the workforce with jobs.

But it's the working class that suffers the consequences of overpopulation and the failings of their rulers. Do you suppose the workers should breed like rabbits and starve themselves to death just to spite the ruling class?

Population control is the most humane policy there can be in a country like China. The less people, the more resources there are to go around.

Judging from what I've seen, a life of poverty in China is way more cruel than forced stirilizations and even forced abortions. :(

[Coggeh]

Somewhat true. This year, China could only provide half the people newly entering the workforce with jobs.

But it's the working class that suffers the consequences of overpopulation and the failings of their rulers. Do you suppose the workers should breed like rabbits and starve themselves to death just to spite the ruling class?

Population control is the most humane policy there can be in a country like China. The less people, the more resources there are to go around.

Judging from what I've seen, a life of poverty in China is way more cruel than forced stirilizations and even forced abortions. :(
Firstly I don't believe China is overpopulated see here: http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.php?p=1527762&postcount=36

The capitalist system has failed in China to deliver for the majority of ordinary people there and you blame overpopulation ? its reactionary of leftists to blame such things as overpopulation or too many immigrants rather than putting forward a socialist alternative to the absolute failure of the free market system.

[RedStarOverChina]

Firstly I don't believe China is overpopulated see here: http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.php?p=1527762&postcount=36


It's meaningless to argue whether China is overpopulated.

Because so long as there are enough food and shelter in the country it wouldn't be considered overpopulated in the technical sense.

However, we know that people need mroe than just enough food and shelter to live humanely. People need abundance in resources.

Moreover, it's no secret that the more workers there are, the easier to pit them against themselves and devalue their labour. It's much easier to exploit a billion workers when there are only half the amount of jobs. It is in the interest of the Chinese working class to have fewer children.




The capitalist system has failed in China to deliver for the majority of ordinary people there and you blame overpopulation ?

Eh, I said it's both.
And please don't alleviate this into another one of those ideological crusades against reactionaries. No one's cheering for Dengist market reforms here.

[Vanguard1917]

Population control is the most humane policy there can be in a country like China. The less people, the more resources there are to go around.

Really? So why are there countries that are far more densely populated than China and yet also have far lower lower levels of poverty?



Judging from what I've seen, a life of poverty in China is way more cruel than forced stirilizations and even forced abortions. :(


You have made the basic Malthusian error of assuming that poverty can only be made worse by population growth, which is what has led you to such an abhorrent, reactionary and un-Marxist position.



It's much easier to exploit a billion workers when there are only half the amount of jobs. It is in the interest of the Chinese working class to have fewer children.



Hmm. I thought Marxists argued that it's in the interests of the working class to fight the bosses and make a revolution. Apparently, what's needed to fight exploitation is for workers to stop "breed[ing] like rabbits", as you so respectfully put it.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Really? So why are there countries that are far more densely populated than China and yet also have far lower lower levels of poverty?

I don't know what the state of farming is like in China, but I do know that Europe has an extremely productive and efficient agriculture, to the point where more food is produced than the market can handle - wine lakes and butter mountains and all that. Likewise in the US, the government actually pays farmers to produce less than they are actually capable of.

Of course, this suggests that China's problems could be fixed by an improvement in agriculture as opposed to population reduction.

[SocialismOrBarbarism]

I support it. The more population growth there is, the more capital accumulation is necessary and the longer capitalism can sustain itself.

[Vanguard1917]

I support it. The more population growth there is, the more capital accumulation is necessary and the longer capitalism can sustain itself.

Then why did anti-capitalist revolutionaries like Marx, Engels and Lenin so strongly condemn Malthusianism as utterly reactionary and anti-working class? I ask you this since you claim to be a 'Revolutionary Marxist'.

[SocialismOrBarbarism]

Then why did anti-capitalist revolutionaries like Marx, Engels and Lenin so strongly condemn Malthusianism as utterly reactionary and anti-working class? I ask you this since you claim to be a 'Revolutionary Marxist'.

What does my post have to do with Malthusianism?

Ever heard of the tendency of the rate of profit to fall? I ask you this since you claim to be a 'Marxist'.

[Vanguard1917]

What does my post have to do with Malthusianism?

You support a Malthusian policy -- Malthusianism being something which Marx, Engels and Lenin 'strongly condemn[ed]...as utterly reactionary and anti-working class' (to quote from my previous post).



Ever heard of the tendency of the rate of profit to fall?


Had Marx, Engels and Lenin? Yes. What did that have to do with them rejecting Malthusian ideology?

[SocialismOrBarbarism]

You support a Malthusian policy -- Malthusianism being something which Marx, Engels and Lenin 'strongly condemn[ed]...as utterly reactionary and anti-working class' (to quote from my previous post).

A Malthusian policy? Malthusian ideology? So if someone says they support something that Malthusians also suggested, they must be doing so with the same underlying reasoning? You could just as logically say I support feudal ideology because I oppose capitalism, since the aristocracies did also. You're not even making any arguments, you're just saying "WELL MARX OPPOSED IT," as if that alone constitutes an argument.


Had Marx, Engels and Lenin? Yes. What did that have to do with them rejecting Malthusian ideology?
It has to do with population growth being a countervailing tendency to the falling rate of profit. How supporting something that will decrease capitalism's ability to sustain itself can be reactionary is beyond me.

[Vanguard1917]

A Malthusian policy? Malthusian ideology? So if someone says they support something that Malthusians also suggested


It's not just 'something' Malthusians suggest -- advocating policies to reduce population growth is Malthusianism.

How do you reconcile your Malthusianism with your supposed Marxism?



It has to do with population growth being a countervailing tendency to the falling rate of profit. How supporting something that will decrease capitalism's ability to sustain itself can be reactionary is beyond me.


In what way would Malthusian policies 'decrease capitalism's ability to sustain itself'?

[SocialismOrBarbarism]

It's not just 'something' Malthusians suggest -- advocating policies to reduce population growth is Malthusianism.

How do you reconcile your Malthusianism with your supposed Marxism?

No, it's not. They have specific reasons for wanting to limit population growth. If someone proposed limiting population growth because they simply didn't like people, would that be Malthusianism? If someone supported population control for racist reasons, would that be Malthusianism? No. I'm not arguing anything to do with "overpopulation" or "population crisis" or any other similar nonsense.


In what way would Malthusian policies 'decrease capitalism's ability to sustain itself'?

"It has to do with population growth being a countervailing tendency to the falling rate of profit."

[Coggeh]

It's meaningless to argue whether China is overpopulated.
Hardly, as you've already said you support a reformed version of a one child policy so why would there need be that policy if China wasn't overpopulated?




Because so long as there are enough food and shelter in the country it wouldn't be considered overpopulated in the technical sense.

However, we know that people need more than just enough food and shelter to live humanely. People need abundance in resources. Their are 2billion people living in dire poverty living on less than 2 dollars a day under capitalism.But as you put it the problem is that there is just too many of them for resources to go around.



Moreover, it's no secret that the more workers there are, the easier to pit them against themselves and devalue their labour.It's much easier to exploit a billion workers when there are only half the amount of jobs. It is in the interest of the Chinese working class to have fewer children.

This is not a reason for leftists to support overpopulation controls and for the same reason we don't oppose immigration.Capitalism strives on divide and rule tactics of workers no matter how many workers there are . Limiting the amount of them isn't going to stop that.We must put forward a progressive alternative of socialism rather than buy into capitalist flawed ideas.



Eh, I said it's both.
And please don't alleviate this into another one of those ideological crusades against reactionaries. No one's cheering for Dengist market reforms here.I didn't say you were. I was merely pointing out that your view on the problem of 'overpopulation' is that of a reactionary viewpoint and doesn't examine the fundamental problems of society in China.

[Vanguard1917]

No, it's not. They have specific reasons for wanting to limit population growth. If someone proposed limiting population growth because they simply didn't like people, would that be Malthusianism? If someone supported population control for racist reasons, would that be Malthusianism? No. I'm not arguing anything to do with "overpopulation" or "population crisis" or any other similar nonsense.

But in the end you still support the same policy. It's like those who support immigration controls. Some support them with racist justifications, some with environmentalist justifications, and some even with 'socialist' justifications ('it drives down wages', 'it's a barrier to trade union organisation', and so on). But, whatever their particular reasons for supporting it, they ultimately support the same reactionary policy.