The economist drew my attention to the following story. The article vividly describes a picture that can easily be found on the Internet. The graphic picture and the stirring story behind it offer an opportunity for Western mass media to disparage Chinese one-child policy. I did not replicate it here as I realized that all mass media don’t show the photo and I’m even not sure whether it is a falsification. By clicking the image above you may find it. Also depending on your location you may use the google search string.
I won’t go on to participate in the debate about China’s policy. This is a mere ideological questions, and may the combatants in each camp gain satisfaction in attacking each other. Unfortunately such a squabble over ideology rarely helps the victims.
The question to be looked into here is what are the implications about fauceir theory. Well one point has already touched above, that is the struggle between big social fauceirs (empires) which is mirrored in this ideological struggle. The other point is to illustrate differences in the way that social fauceir (the government in China and the culture in the West) controls the behavior of sub-fauceirs, the families in this case. In European countries as in China we have a low, socially controlled, birth rates. While in China this is rather simply accomplished by governmental pressure in Western countries this as rather fulfilled by economic incentives. This is consistent with the fertility regulation discussed before in this blog.
Next this finding demonstrate the fauceir inheritance rule. While the fauceir evolutionary history in the in West favored a social birth control through economic pressure, luring the population into satisfaction by buying products, Chinas economy at the time when the one-child policy was introduced had not such a developed economy and first of all not such fervent consumers yet to exert birth control through economic incentives. But as China’s economy changes the method of control will change too, so we already witness the effect that Chinese people who inhabit big cities refuse to have children at all even though birth control policy is no more such restrictive there.
Finally social birth control regardless of its method of accomplishment illustrates the reason for the Malthus Paradox. Human birth control was essential to take place otherwise as Malthus predicted famine and social unrest would ensue. We can witness such social instability everywhere on the planet where social birth control is not effective.
What are the projections about the development of social birth control. One may conclude, that according to fauceir evolution rules, social birth control will be fine tuned in the future. So far in all societies that exert such a control there is an off-switch only. The challenge will be to evolve an on-switch too, and to turn on reproduction of specific people. To my knowledge this is only possible by test tube babies. Not a very popular idea at the moment, but sooner or later social leaders will come up with it. I’m sure.
This work by Paul Netman is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.
Fauceir theory is developed and © by Mato Nagel and available at www.fauceir.org.