From the Documents of Neo-Malthusianism – Depopulation for Perpetual Enslavement

Who Is Malthus?

Thomas Robert Malthus (1766 – 1834), is an English bourgeois theoretician and political-economist. His central theme was that population increases in a geometrical ratio (1, 2, 3, 4, 8…etc.), while food increases in an arithmetical ratio. Therefore, population must be continually reduced in number in order to keep within the range of balance with «the natural limitation» of means of subsistence. Malthus expounded this idea for the first time in his book «An Essay on the Principle of Population, as It Affects the Future Improvement of Society», 1st ed. London 1798, pp. 13-17:

“Assuming then my postulata as granted, I say, that the power of population is indefinitely greater than the power in the earth to produce subsistence for man. Population, when unchecked, increases in a geometrical ratio. Subsistence increases only in an arithmetical ratio. A slight acquaintance with numbers will shew the immensity of the first power in comparison of the second. By that law of our nature which makes food necessary to the life of man, the effects of these two unequal powers must be kept equal. This implies a strong and constantly operating check on population from the difficulty of subsistence. This difficulty must fall somewhere and must necessarily be severely felt by a large portion of mankind… The race of plants and the race of animals shrink under this great restrictive law. And the race of man cannot, by any efforts of reason, escape from it. Among plants and animals its effects are waste of seed, sickness, and premature death. Among mankind, misery and vice… I see no way by which man can escape from the weight of this law which pervades all animated nature. No fancied equality, no agrarian regulations in their utmost extent, could remove the pressure of it even for a single century. And it appears, therefore, to be decisive against the possible existence of a society, all the members of which should live in ease, happiness, and comparative leisure; and feel no anxiety about providing the means of subsistence for themselves and families.”

Malthus ideas had provoked a polemical debate, receiving admiration and engorgement by the English and European ruling elites at the time, especially in concurrence with their fear of the revolutionary mobilizations in the continent, while faced with extreme hatred by the English working class, a hatred which Karl Marx considered  “fully justified and the people’s instinct was correct here, in that they felt that he was no man of science, but a bought advocate of their opponents, a shameless sycophant of the ruling classes.” In addition, Fredrich Engels said in 1844 that according to Malthus claim, “the earth was already over-populated when only one man existed.”

The Marxist scholar John Bellamy Foster has noticed that Malthus' ideas had had a negative effect even on some thinkers and activists of the working class, such as Francis Place who preferred to call for “birth control” as a substitute for class organization of the proletariat. It was not surprising, therefore, that Marx's position was that “what characterises Malthus is the fundamental meanness of his outlook.”

The Scientific Political Economy of Population

“Overpopulation” was recognized by Marx as “a historically determined relation, in no way determined by abstract numbers or by the absolute limit of the productivity of the necessaries of life, but by the limits posited rather by specific conditions of production”. Marx made his critique that “Malthusian man, abstracted from historically determined man, exists only in his brain.”

John Smith, in his book “Imperialism in the Twenty-First Century” reminds us that:

Marx used the term “relative surplus population” for a specific feature of capitalist social relations, the outcome of the “capitalist law of population,” whose discovery he considered to be one of his most important findings in Capital: capitalism's tendency to generate what he called a surplus population. There are two aspects to this. one is capitalism's dissolution of the traditional rural economy: “as soon as capitalist production takes possession of agriculture, and in proportion to the extent to which it does so, the demand for a rural working population falls absolutely… Part of the agricultural population is therefore constantly on the point of passing over into an urban or manufacturing proletariat.” The destruction of precapitalist social formations is only one reason why the relative surplus population is increasing in every nation of the Global South. Capitalism not only creates a surplus population at the frontiers of its collision with pre-capitalist social formations, but, according to Marx,

“Capitalist accumulation itself constantly produces… [i]n direct relation with its own energy and extent, a relatively redundant working population, i.e. a population which is superfluous to capital’s average requirements for its own valorisation and is therefore a surplus population… The working population therefore produces both the accumulation of capital and the means by which it is itself made relatively superfluous; and it does this to an extent which is always increasing. This is a law of population peculiar to the capitalist mode of production.”

The annexation of the Global South to the imperialist economy since the Second world war and especially since 1980s brings together both of these trends, the dispossession of small farmers and other small producers on the one hand, and the substitution of wage labor by machinery on the other. This has not only made capitalism more exploitative of labour but also less employing of living labour, leading to reduction in the required number of workers due to the advanced technology. Today’s vast and growing informal economy corresponds to the relative surplus population analyzed by Marx in “Das Capital” more that a century and a half ago. “Reserve army of labor”, as part of this “relative surplus population” keeps increasing globally non-stop. For example, “the percentage of workers in informal employment… [i]ncreased from 76.2 percent in 1999–00 to 87.5 percent in 2010,” according to 2013 ILO survey.

In fact, “relative surplus population” is never “surplus” at all, except relative to the needs of the rotten capitalist relations of production, and it has been, as it is, targeted for annihilation of part of it by the Neo-Malthusians, and the number they estimate as “dangerous” on them as global elite is calculated in congruous with their interests, so that they implement the targeted mass extermination by several means: direct and indirect; overt and covert; by carrots and intimidation; and by downsizing the existing living people and those who are not born yet.

Darwin's Theory Refutes Malthus

Ironically, the reactionary non-scientific Malthusianism received an added boost in 1859 after Darwin published his progressive scientific theory on “The Origin of the Species by Means of Natural Selection”. In chapter three of his book, entitled “The Struggle for Existence,” Darwin wrote,

“A struggle for existence inevitably follows from the high rate at which all organic beings tend to increase. Every being, which during its natural lifetime produces several eggs or seeds, must suffer destruction during some period of its life, and during some season or occasional year, otherwise, on the principle of geometrical increase, its numbers would quickly become so inordinately great that no country could support the product. Hence, as more individuals are produced than can possibly survive, there must in every case be a struggle for existence, either one individual with another of the same species, or with the individuals of distinct species, or with the physical conditions of life. It is the doctrine of Malthus applied with manifold force to the whole animal and vegetable kingdoms; for in this case there can be no artificial increase of food, and no prudential restraint from marriage.”

In fact, Darwin had himself unknowingly refuted Malthus. In “Theories of Surplus Value” (1861-3) Marx wrote:

“In his splendid work, Darwin did not realise that by discovering the “geometrical” progression in the animal and plant kingdom, he overthrew Malthus’s theory.  Malthus’s theory is based on the fact that he set Wallace’s geometrical progression of man against the chimerical “arithmetical” progression of animals and plants.”

Thus, this is the essential difference between Darwin and Malthus; the speed of increasing in a geometrical ratio, according to Darwin, is not a result of an “exclusive law” restricted to human beings, because it is also in a geometrical (not arithmetical)  ratio increase plants and animals, namely the main food resources for humans! Actually, it is the distribution of wealth what constitutes the essence of the matter in question here, the essence which the Neo-Malthusians want to mystify and keep themselves and others blind about. It is a problem of a historical social class-related character, not a mere “natural” one.

«Social Darwinism» as a form of Malthusianism

Social Darwinism is a broad group of eclectic ideas which have nothing real to do with the Darwinian theory, but drew directly on Malthus, Herbert Spencer, and “various nineteenth-century racist thinkers” as Foster said. In the United States the leading academic social Darwinist was William Graham Sumner who argued that, “The millionaires are a product of natural selection.” 

In deed, if when we search for the term “survival of the fittest” we find that the first one who used it was not Darwin, but his citizen and contemporaneous Herbert Spencer, in the year 1864 in his book “The Principles of Biology”. He considered his term equivalent to Darwin's “natural selection” when extended to include the human society. Spencer wrote in “The Man Versus The State”, 1884:

“As Mr. Darwin shows … [d]isappearance of intermediate forms, less fitted for special spheres of existence … [is] an inference which is in harmony with what we know respecting races of men and … animals.”

However, it should be known that Darwin himself wrote to some German social Darwinists, stressing that it had not earlier occurred to him that his views on species were relevant to social questions, as mentioned in chapter 19 of “Darwin and the Darwinian Revolution”, 1959, by the historian Gertrude Himmelfarb.

Of course, Social Darwinism was extremely attractive to the likes of John D. Rockefeller who said that “the growth of a large business is merely a survival of the fittest… It is merely the working out of a law of nature and a law of God”. Social Darwinism has for long time used to justify imperialist, fascist, and Zionist policies of mass violence, annihilation, and genocide.

History of Eugenics

Amidst a mixture of racism, monopolistic, hegemonic and colonialist tendency, emerged the doctrine of Eugenics (“good birth” in Greek). According to historical account of Eugenics in Jacqueline Kasun's book “War Against Population”, 1999, the pioneer of Eugenics was Sir Francis Galton, who was a relative of Charles Darwin but unrelated to him in ideas. Galton studied statistics and some other sciences. In 1883 he declared that the goal of his research is to give the “more suitable races or strains of blood a better chance of prevailing speedily over the less suitable”.

He believed that blacks were genetically inferior, and that poverty was transmitted in the genes. Karl Pearson, a disciple of Galton, discussed “the sterilization of those sections of the community of small civic worth”. in 1907, Indiana passed the world's first compulsory sterilization law, aimed at criminals and idiots. Thirty states followed suit, drawing heavily from a Model Eugenical Law written by Harry Laughlin, who have been suspected with having inspired the Nazi compulsory sterilization laws. Laughlin served as a Superintendent of the Eugenics Record Office from its inception in 1910 to its closing in 1939, supported by the Carnegie Institution of Washington for “experimental evolution”.

In 1912 the First International Congress of Eugenics was held at the University of London. Its vice-presidents included, Winston Churchill among others. Its goal: the “prevention of the propagation of the unfit”. One of the most energetic eugenicists of the time was Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood in New York in 1916. The second International Congress of Eugenics was held in 1921. In 1922 Sanger in her “Birth Control Review” zeroed in on criticizing free maternity care for the poor women, because she saw that this forces “the healthier and more normal sections of the world to shoulder... the unthinking and indiscriminate fecundity of others; which brings with it... a dead weight of human waste... ”.

The Third International Congress of Eugenics was held in 1932 and featured a call for the sterilization of fourteen million Americans with low intelligence-test scores. Since 1958 the Neo-Malthusianism of Population Reference Bureau began preparedness for the globalization of their birth control agenda outside USA, taking advantage of President Eisenhower appointment of their friend General William Draper, Jr. as a chairman of a governmental committee to investigate the impact of foreign aid on economic growth in foreign countries. Draper Report was issued in 1959 as the first official government report to take a stand on birth control. The first practical translation of the report was the launching of the World Population Emergency Campaign in 1960. In 1970 The Neo-Malthusianism lobbied in “Earth Day” to promote the proclamation that “pollution was primarily caused by too many people”. The same thing was also repeated on Earth Day in 1992 when they attract part of the activists, ecological organizations, “greens”, “feminists”, and other NGOs and civil society, which have been, and still are, sponsored by the undertakers of the Neo-Malthusianism agenda for depopulation of humanity globally. Under the terms of Sections 102 and I04(d) of the International Development and Food Assistance Act of 1978, the entire foreign aid program must be geared to encourage smaller families in all countries receiving U.S. aid. The same thing is also followed by the World Bank and IMF.

Using Some Vaccines for Depopulation

On the 27^th of October 2017, seven researchers of US, Canadian Universities and Kenyan doctors, published a scientific paper which included details about how the Kenya Catholic Doctors Association found the hormone Beta-hCG in samples of the tetanus vaccine from the WHO campaign in Kenya 2013–2015, which had weirdly targeted only women in child-bearing age. The problem was that the presence of this hormone (which is known to be normally high in pregnancy) inside the tetanus shots were not able to interpreted except as an intentional tool for sterilization, especially that such combination of Beta-hCG and tetanus toxoids in the form of vaccine has been already studied, experimented, and patented as invention supported and sponsored by Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. However, this sterilizing vaccine must not be given to any women without a full informed consent by her, unlike what actually happened in the case of the Kenyan women who were, in fact, victims because of being given these shots without any informed consent.

Previously, the documentary film “Cold Case Hammarskjold” has incited debate not resolved about if it is true or wrong in the claims included in the it about a paramilitary organization, with suspected links to UK, called SAIMAR, which involved in operations to propagate HIV (the virus of AIDS) through false vaccines in South Africa in the early 1990s under the apartheid regime.

Regarding Coronaviruses, a scientific paper from the US Army was published in the journal “Vaccine” on the 1^st of October 2019, concluded that the seasonal flu shots that were given to American soldiers have actually increased their predisposition to be infected by Coronaviruses by about 36% more than the unvaccinated people. This has made some doctors and researchers, like the well-known Irish professor Dolores Cahill, suggest as a hypothesis that if these flu vaccines were distributed in the 2019 season in Italy (and maybe also in Wuhan), this may, partly, provide an explanation of why these areas where comparatively more violently hit by the pandemic than other areas in the world.

Finally, it is suitable to remind the reader that one of the most prominent contemporary Neo-Malthusians today is William Henry Gates III, known as Bill Gates of Microsoft. He is descendent, in his maternal family line, from nobody but the same above-mentioned Margarete Sanger, the founder on Planned Parenthood. In 2010 this “Prince” William Henry Gates III promoted in one of his presentation to the following idea: “The world today has 6.8 billion people. That's headed up to about nine billion. Now, if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by, perhaps, 10 or 15 percent”.