Malthus, T. R. (Thomas Robert), 1766-1834; Malthusianism
In society, as it was in the first years of the nineteenth century,
Malthus thinks he can trace out even by his own observation an
“oscillation,” or what it is the fashion to call a “cycle,” in the
movement of population. History does not show it well, simply because
“the histories of mankind which we possess are in general only of the
higher classes,”[152] and it is the labouring classes to which the
observation applies. Their painful experience of the ruder checks has
not prevented a “constant effort” in the labouring population to have
larger families than they can well support. The consequence is that
their numbers are increased; they must divide amongst eleven and a half
millions the food that was formerly divided among eleven millions; they
must have lower wages and dearer provisions. But this state of distress
will so check population that in process of time the numbers will be
almost at a standstill, while at the same time, since the demand for
food has been greater and labour has been cheaper, the application of
capital to agriculture will have increased the available food. The
result will be the same tolerable degree of comfort as at the beginning
of the cycle, and the same relapse from it as at the second stage. He
conceives the two stages to follow each other as naturally as sunshine
rain and rain sunshine. The existence of such a cycle may remain
concealed from the ordinary historian, if he looks merely to the money
wages of the labourer, for it frequently happens that the labourer gets
the same sums of money for his wages during a long series of years when
the real value of the sums has not remained the same,—the price of bread
in what we have called the second stage of the cycle being much dearer
than it was in the first, and than it will be in the third.[153] Though
Malthus expressly qualifies his statements by showing that civilization
tends to counteract these fluctuations, it certainly seemed to be his
belief in 1803 that on the whole the working classes of Europe, and
especially of England, were powerless to escape from them. How far this
view is justified will be seen presently.
CHAPTER IV.
THE SAVAGE, BARBARIAN, AND ORIENTAL.
Simile supplanted by Fact—Savage Life—Population dependent not on
possible but on actual Food—Indirect Action of Positive
Checks—Hunger not a Principle of Progress—Otaheite a Crux for Common
Sense—Cycle in the Movement of Population—Pitcairn Island—Barbarian
and Oriental—Nomad Shepherds—Abram and Lot—Cimbri and
Teutones—Gibbon _versus_ Montesquieu—“At bay on the limits of the
Universe”—Misgovernment an indirect Check on Population—Ancient
Europe less populous than Modern—Civilization the gradual Victory of
the third Check.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account