An Argument for Overpopulation

Considering the disaster that faces mankind if overpopulation exists and is worsening, it is an amazement that it is so difficult to demonstrate. In this essay I intend to provide as convincing an argument as I can that such a state now exists. Malthus was the first well known proponent of this theory and he has been followed in modern times by Paul Ehrlich of Stanford in his book, The Population Bomb.
This difficulty of perception is not easy to understand in light of the population curve. If one is rational, one has to expect dramatic change of some sort based on the population curve. So, there must be some sort of recognition avoidance in existence, since most do not see any reason to expect dramatic change based on this graph. It can not be due to lack of exposure. The population curve has been represented in many documents and discussed on plenty of television programs. If reality avoidance is the culprit, there must be some favorite belief that is lost when one accepts that a problem exists. The probable belief system that is damaged by this recognition is religion. Another problem contributing to lack of belief is human failure to accurately predict in the past. After that, those that don't wish to believe will mount a propaganda campaign which can be relied on to produce a 50/50 split in belief. This state will obtain until irrefutable evidence arrives. Even then, many will blame the disaster on other causes, not the least of which will be punishment from God for man's iniquities.
The general theory is that human population expands exponentially as does any species when its source of predation is eliminated, and that, with the advent of the practice of inoculation along with other schemes, mankind has disabled its natural predators, germs and viruses. To expand on this point we might say that any species achieves a state of equilibrium within its environment whereby the number of offspring produced equals the number of extent members of the species plus those expected to be lost to predation. How this number of members is established is unknown, but one can surmise that a large increase would lead to imbalances in the food chain, while a large decrease would threaten the survivability of the species.
We can say from the Population Curve, that numbers of humans hovered between 500,000,000 and 1,000,000,000 for many centuries. We can therefore conclude that the balance between birth and death was stabilized at that point because those are the numbers of humans that can function in the ecosystem without causing imbalances to occur, and that population only shot upward beginning in about the time of Pasteur and that, therefore, the problem is the application of scientific technology to the study of medicine.
Any species overproduces offspring in order to compensate for the inevitability of losses. When a species succeeds in learning how to interdict the predation on himself, he allows himself to propagate excessively if he does not at the same time find a way to stop overproducing. The design of living entities changes only slowly in response to changes in the environment, so this mechanism can't be expected to compensate for the above mentioned interdiction.
The next point to make is that humans like to congregate in a small area for social reasons and as a defense mechanism. That being the case, overpopulation is nothing new to humanity. As the population grows in a local area, eventually political problems arise which leads to a split and conflict between the two groups. This produces a winner and a loser, which leads to emigration of the loser to a new land. This has happened repeatedly in history. The Jews were exiled to slavery in Egypt. The Puritans were exiled to the New World. The Mormons were exiled to Salt Lake. English criminals were exiled to Australia. In prehistory, we can take it that it happened many times indeed.
The point is that this was a valuable mechanism for eliminating political unrest, and one that is no longer available to us. The disappearance of the ability to emigrate should inform us that we exist in an overpopulated state.
Food is a primary concern of any species. It cannot exist except in a location that also produces its favored food source. When a species rises in numbers to the point that its food source begins to decline in numbers, it should be clear that a state of overpopulation has arisen. Humans have a diverse appetite, satisfied by many living things. Numbers of humans have long since required that man artificially increase the numbers of the things that he eats since nature does not produce enough. This state of affairs would seem to have arrived at about the time civilization arose, so that, we can surmise that civilization can be characterized as a state wherein a species studies how the environment can be coaxed into producing more food than normal. As I said, this state of affairs has existed for many centuries. But a new stage has arrived. Not only are land animals insufficient to supply mankind in a natural state, now sea animals, fish, have also arrived at this stage, so that we must anticipate that sea farming is not far distant. So, insufficiency in the food supply should inform us that a state of overpopulation exists.
We should also be sensitive to the fact that in farming areas, the environment has to be managed in order to eliminate predators of the crop. So that, significant environmental management is required, this is what we have to anticipate now, for the ocean. Those areas that are chosen as fish farms will require our efforts to eliminate predators of the food source fish. This will lead to further declines in viable species on our scale.
All species must have space in which to exist. Not only that, for emigration purposes, extra space should also exist. Two conditions inform us that insufficient space exists. Emigration is no longer possible except to an already fully if not overpopulated land, or to one that does not readily support human life, like Siberia or Northern Canada. The second is that from the declining numbers of other species we can take it that we have overrun their spaces, thereby depriving them of space to live. If this condition continues, as it is certain to do, we must anticipate many less advanced species on the earth. Smaller species, such as insects, can coexist with us, but not advanced species, of the same scale as we. Only species that coexist with humans, usually by satisfying some need of humans aren't threatened. So, we must anticipate a world with few advanced species in it. This should tell us that the world is overpopulated with humans. It may well be anticipated that this is a very chancy state of affairs. We might well eliminate a crucial species that cripples the food chain and leads to a mass extinction, which we must anticipate will mean us too.
All species need spaces in which to put their waste and in which to die. Spaces that aren't needed by the living. Humans are having progressively more difficulty in finding such spaces. Burial grounds are in shorter and shorter supply, forcing much more reliance on burning as a disposal method, and spaces in which to bury an ever larger amount of waste material is not to be found. Where such places exist, such as the unpopulated desert, the owners of that land refuse to allow it to be used for such purposes. So, the diminishment of waste space should inform us that an overabundance of humans exists.

Subtle Problems that may Emanate from a State of Overpopulation

1. Terrorism

Terrorism would seem to arise from the perceived need by minorities to impose their ideology on the majority. This problem has become acutely noticeable only in the last 30-40 years, so that one presumes it to be produced by some new feature of the environment. When sufficient space exists, people don't care what ideology is professed and practiced by their neighbors. Therefore we can expect that overpopulation is the culprit here.

2. Gratuitous Violence

Examples of gratuitous violence would be drive-by shootings and massacres in high population establishments like restaurants. Two possibilities suggest themselves as reasons for this sort of behavior. In the first case young people banding together to establish families because the normal kind has broken down. The breakdown of normal families occurs because one or both parents desert the children. Perhaps this occurs because lower class parents are no longer valued, but rather, are treated as a burden to society as a result of overpopulation. In the second case one would expect people who resort to such an action to have a profound grudge against humanity. This arises when a person feels his life has been ruined by an uncaring society. Perhaps this happens when there is such an excessive number of humans in need that many of them fall through the cracks, as it were.

3. Over Dependence on Intoxicating Drugs

Intoxication results when humans wish to change perceived reality, usually to escape from mental pain. This is also most notably a feature of the ghetto. Perhaps this results when the perception of the poor is that the society within which they exist cares not whether they live or die. To escape from the pain of this knowledge they resort to drugs.

4. Excessive Occurrence of Mental Derangement

I don't see overpopulation as a cause of mental derangement, since it seems to me to be a physical ailment, proceeding from viral infection of the brain, or birth defect. But excessive humans will as a matter of course increase absolute numbers of people in such a state. Also a correlation could be made with excessive population density since ghetto residents will have a particularly unhealthy life style which will mean they are easy prey for viruses. As the cost of maintenance of the poor population rises and therefore the quality declines, this might be expected to increase the dimensions of the problem.

5. Rebellion Against Societal Norms

Frustration with a culture that cannot provide a means of livelihood that also includes self respect can be expected to produce this response. Overpopulation might reasonably be expected to be a factor here.

6. Excessive illegitimacy and divorce rates

This problem could reasonably be blamed on family breakdown too. Children of such families will seek out comfort to the extent of establishing sexual relationships before the stability of age has arrived.

7. Excessive Crime

The crime of stealing will be attributable to poverty in most cases. That and a lack of appreciation for societal values. It is exacerbated by drug use, since many addicts will steal to support their habit. So, previously mentioned problems such as alienation can be used to explain this too.

8. Rising Incidence of Extremist Sects

The perception of extreme circumstances, which all of the above will produce, will induce some kinds of people to look at prophesies about the future, the most significant of which is the book of Revelation in the Bible. Because this prophesy is written in symbolic terms it can be applied to any extreme circumstances and has been many times throughout history. So, it should be no surprise that overpopulation will produce many unusual sects. The fact that the year 2000 is approaching can also be expected to be a factor.

9. Change in Philosophy and Ideology

The general perception of extreme conditions should be expected to speed philosophical change or to produce a change from one ideology into its opposite because of the sense that since something is wrong, the proper response is to change. From this point of view we can blame the rise of feminism on population pressure. Of course you can also say that masculinism caused the population pressure, by inventing technology.

10. Local Wars

Local and/or Civil wars can frequently be traced to population pressure. The Bosnian war, the Middle Eastern wars, many of the wars in late twentieth century Africa, all are easily explained as induced or exacerbated by population pressure.

China, India, and the US Compared

Finally, it is necessary to reach some conclusions as to why we should consider America to be overpopulated, when China and India are so much worse. Doesn't that mean that we need not worry until we get up to the numbers they are supporting? No, this is a fallacious argument, for a number of reasons. First, we must take population to be the product of the number of humans and the amount of space required to dispose of their waste products. Were this calculation done, we would find little difference in population density between those countries and ours (they are in the region of 1 billion population while we are 250 million, about one quarter in about the same space. We produce easily four times as much waste, think of the cars and worse the vehicular disposables. Think of the amount of pesticides and herbicides. Look at this population map, adjusted for industrialization). Second, they proceed from feminist, non-aggressive cultures. Passive peoples can be packed more densely than aggressive ones. This argument also applies to the idea that there is a population pressure factor in the rise of feminism. The differences in industrialization make for differences in damage, both on the plus side and the minus side. On the minus side, there is much more toxic waste to dispose of in industrial countries, and much area is removed from the natural state, on the plus side, enough wealth exists to apply some advanced techniques to the amelioration effort.