Malthus, T. R. (Thomas Robert), 1766-1834; Malthusianism
they were the nearest and best known savages of their kind, and their
necessary labours were in Europe rich men’s pleasures. But hunting and
river-fishing cannot yield much food unless pursued over a wide area. A
hunter is so far like the beast of prey which he pursues, that he must
go long distances for his food, and must either fly from or overcome
every rival. The North American Indian must therefore either go West
after his old food, or else he must stay where he is, to beat off the
Europeans, or to adopt their food and their habits. “The Indians have
only two ways of saving themselves, war and civilization. They must
either destroy the Europeans or become their equals.”[160] As the
civilization of a nation of hunters is almost impossible, their
extinction seems inevitable. The question remains, How is this
population cut down to the level of its food?
In Malthus’ answer to the question occur three remarks of great general
importance. First, what limits the numbers of a people is not the
possible but the actual food.[161] Second, want destroys a population
less often directly by starvation than indirectly through the medium of
manners and customs.[162] Third, the mere pressure of impending
starvation does not lead to progress.[163]
Malthus is never tired of insisting on the first of these remarks; and a
proper understanding of it is essential to a fair judgment on his
doctrine. He never says that it is the tendency of a population to
increase up to the limits of the greatest possible amount of food that
can be produced in a given country. The valley of the Mississippi when
highly cultivated may possibly support a hundred millions; but the
question is not what it would do when highly cultivated, but what it can
do when cultivated as it now is and as men now are. “In a general view
of the American continent as described by historians, the population
seems to have been spread over the surface very nearly in proportion to
the quantity of food which the inhabitants of the different parts in the
actual state of their industry and improvements could as a matter of
fact obtain; and that with few exceptions it pressed hard against this
limit, rather than fell short of it, appears from the frequent
recurrence of distress for want of food in all parts of America.”[164]
What is said here of the Indians a hundred years ago applies to the
Colonists now. “The actual state of industry” is of course a much more
improved one; but the population the land will bear is still in
proportion to it, and the amount could not have been increased till the
actual state of the industry had first been bettered. One cause of the
decay of the numbers of the Indians was that their method of industry,
so far from becoming better, became worse by their contact with
Europeans, and therefore the limit of population was actually contracted
instead of being extended.[165] This explains how it is that their
diminishing numbers do not bring them greater comfort. Whether the
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