The Daily Worker Newspaper, June 21, 1924, Page 9

- ~: On Population and Birth Control ERHAPS you are one of those who, in recent years, have been guilty of thinking about some of the evils confronting society — unemploy- ment with its attendant misery, reduc- tion in the standard of living of the working masses, danger of future wars, Perhaps you are one of those who advocate drastic measures for the elimination of these evils. You may have been converted to such heresies as unemployment insurance, moratoriums on rents for the unem- ployed, shortening of the working day. Possibly you may have been so far corrupted by the “foreigners” as to believe that the only solution for our present-day evils lay in the elimina- tion of capitalism. If so, then you have been all wrong. Our learned professors have studied the problem carefully. They conclude that our present-lay evils are due to over-pop- ulation, there are too many of us on God’s earth. The remedy, according to the Prof, lies in (quietly, don’t al- low Mr. Sumner to overhear us)— birth-control. At the beginning of the last cen- tury the attention of the world was 4 of them on this planet. Being a preacher, Malthus, naturally based his doctrine on a Bible text, “Many are called but few are chosen.” Since the days of Malthus the pop- ulation of the world has more than doubled and Mother Earth has not as yet collapsed underneath its weight. It still makes its daily round, spin- ning about the sun as in the good old days, but in recent years economic conditions have again brought the problem to the fore. Dislocation of production resulting from the war has brought millions of workers (particu- larly in Europe) face to face with misery and starvation. Large sections of the working class are losing faith in the present system. Such heresies as socialism, communism, bolshevism, are gaining adherents daily. Under these conditions it is but natural that an effort be made on the part of the apologists for the status-quo to divert the attention of the workers from the true cause of their suffering. Accord- ingly, the doctrine of old Malthus has been unearthed, polished, and brought up to date with the aid of modern statistics. And once again we are told (this time by professors) that the first, the chicken or the egg. Another Prof is more certain. He says: “Such figures, which could be cited more extensively if, necessary, make out a fair case for the statement that large families and hardships within the fam- ily are too often matters of cause and effect. The destruction of the poor is not wholly due to the Wicked capital- ist who compels them to live in pov- erty; it is due to lack of intelligence, which depresses their productive value to society, and the ignorance which results in their dividing their meager possessions among many instead of among few.” (Mankind at the Cross Roads, -p. 332-333, by Edward M. Bast. Charles Scribner’s Sons, N. Y., 1923.) Hence, according to our learned Prof., the destruction of the poor is due to lack of intelligence . . . Per- haps he is right, after all. The will- ingness on the part.of the poor to submit to the rule of the Rockefel- lers, Morgans, etc., may be evidence of lack of intelligence. It recalls to mind the incident of Judge Gary, who when asked as to whether a certain sum per week was enough for a work- ingman, replied: “I suppose it is if he is willing to accept it.” At any rate A BERLIN MAY DAY DEMONSTRATION | focused on the problem of popula- tion. Modern industrial capitalism was then in its birth-throes. In Eng- land (the classic land of capitalism) the introduction of machinery was ac- companied by dire want and misery of the working masses. Numerous work- ers, displaced by machinery, were thrown upon the streets. Before there could be an adjustment and industry could expand sufficiently to absorb these workers, who had been dis- placed by machinery, many of them were actually starving. The Fuddite strikes were a direct outcome of this condition. The workers, driven by hunger and want to a point of de- spair, attempted to break the: ma- chines. which had robbed them of their bread and butter. At that time there came to the fore a priest named Malthus, and promulgated the doc- “ trine of population. According to Mal- thus the misery and want of the workers was not due to capitalism but to over-population. Workers starved because there were too many misery of the workers is due to over- population. The cure is then very simple indeed. All we have to do is to practice birth-control, and all the present-day evils will disappear. Listen to one of these Profs: “Ev- erywhere the poorer groups are found to have the larger families, and every- where poverty and a high birth rate act and react upon one another. If the birth rate is uncontrolled, the family is dragged down to poverty; if the parents are poor they lack the spirit of control. Whichever be the domi- nant factor the result remains: poy- erty and a high birth rate go hand in hand. The inference is irresistible, that where the birth rate is uncon- trolled poverty will continue.” (The Problem of Population, p. 129-30, by Harold Cox. G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1923.) You see, this Prof is not quite cer- tain as to which causes which—wheth- er poverty is due to big families or big families are the result of poverty. It is like the problem of which came we have to be thankful to the learned gentleman for inserting the word “wholly.” In other words, he admits that the destruction of the poor is in part at least due to the capitalist, who compels them to live in poverty. Note again that according to the Prof the cause of the hardship with- in your family is the size of your fam- ily. Your difficulties lie not in the meagreness of your pay envelope but in the fact that you have too many mouths to feed. Let us all preach and practice birth-control, then the fut- ture generations will surely not have to face any hardships. “But should you ask about improving the lot of the present generation, since it is ob- vious that birth-control cannot lessen the number of those already living, then our learned Profs might reply that we of the present generation have to suffer for the sins of our fathers, for their failure to heed the advice of old man Malthus. Here, of course, the Bibe would support the Prof, for it says: “And the sins of By CHARLES BROWER the father shall be visited upon the children and upon the children’s chil- dren even unto the third generation.” And who, but an ungodly bolshevik would dare question the infallibility of the holy Scripture? Here is another gem from the same Prof. (East): “An absolute just wage distribution would not raise the av- erage income of our subméfged quar- ter by any large figure. This is dem- cnstrated by the complete figures for the United States, which are now available.” (P. 333.) Well, then, let us follow his argument and see what we get. Prof. East states (p.215) that the nai‘onal income turns out to be about sixty billion dollars, or close to $6,000 per capita. Now suppose yours to be an average American family con- sisting of five. Your annual income should then be $3,000. Even then it would hardly compare with the in- come of a New York judge who re- cently resigned becatise he could not live on his salary of $17,500 per year, But aside from that, how many Amer- ican workers earn an annual salary of $3,000? Scott Nearing, after computing, on the basis of the reports of the Inter- state Commerce Commission, the wages of workers employed in various industries in the United States, con- cludes: “In general it is fair to say that the great bulk of the men who work in the various industries of the United States receive less than $30 a week; that perhaps one man in five receives more than $40 per week, and that a very small fraction—well under a tenth, receives more than $50 per week. In the case of women, these figures are nearly twice too high. In the case of farm labor, they may be cut almost in half!” Now you can judge for yourself how much short the pay envelope of even the highest paid worker is from the amount he would be entitled to under an absolutely just wage distri- bution. It should also be borne in mind that the above makes no <allow- ance for the various periods of un- employment that all workers are sub- ject to. It is no wonder then, that (Continued on page 6.) LL ,