February 14, 2013 <Back to Index>
PAGE SPONSOR |
The Reverend Thomas Robert Malthus FRS (14 February 1766 – 29 December 1834) was a British scholar, influential in political economy and demography. Malthus popularised the economic theory of rent. Malthus has become widely known for his theories concerning population and its increase or decrease in response to various factors. The six editions of his An Essay on the Principle of Population, published from 1798 to 1826, observed that sooner or later population gets checked by famine and disease. He wrote in opposition to the popular view in 18th century Europe that saw society as improving and in principle as perfectible. William Godwin and the Marquis de Condorcet, for example, believed in the possibility of almost limitless improvement of society. So, in a more complex way, did Jean - Jacques Rousseau, whose notions centered on the goodness of man and the liberty of citizens bound only by the social contract — a form of popular sovereignty. Malthus thought that the dangers of population growth would preclude endless progress towards a utopian society: "The power of population is indefinitely greater than the power in the earth to produce subsistence for man". As an Anglican clergyman, Malthus saw this situation as divinely imposed to teach virtuous behaviour. Believing that one could not change human nature, Malthus wrote:
Malthus placed the longer term stability of the economy above short term expediency. He criticised the Poor Laws, and (alone among important contemporary economists) supported the Corn Laws, which introduced a system of taxes on British imports of wheat. He thought these measures would encourage domestic production, and so promote long term benefits. Malthus
became hugely influential, and controversial, in economic, political,
social and scientific thought. Many of those whom subsequent centuries
term evolutionary biologists read him, notably Charles Darwin and Alfred Russel Wallace, for each of whom Malthusianism became an intellectual stepping stone to the idea of natural selection. Malthus remains a writer of great significance and controversy. The sixth of seven children of Daniel and Henrietta Malthus, Thomas Robert Malthus grew up in The Rookery, a country house near Westcott in Surrey. Petersen describes Daniel Malthus as "a gentleman of good family and independent means... [and] a friend of David Hume and Jean - Jacques Rousseau". The young Malthus received his education at home in Bramcote, Nottinghamshire, and then at the Dissenting Warrington Academy. He entered Jesus College, Cambridge, in 1784. There he took prizes in English declamation, Latin and Greek, and graduated with honours, Ninth Wrangler in mathematics. He took the MA degree in 1791, and was elected a Fellow of Jesus College, Cambridge, two years later. In 1797, he took orders and in 1798 became an Anglican country curate at Okewood near Albury in Surrey. His portrait, and descriptions by contemporaries, present him as tall and good looking, but with a hare lip and cleft palate. The cleft palate affected his speech: such birth defects had occurred before amongst his relatives. Malthus apparently refused to have his portrait painted until 1833 because of embarrassment over the hare lip. Malthus
married his cousin, Harriet, on April 12, 1804, and had three children:
Henry, Emily and Lucy. In 1805 he became Professor of History and
Political Economy at the East India Company College (now known as Haileybury) in Hertfordshire. His students affectionately referred to him as "Pop" or "Population" Malthus. In 1818 Malthus became a Fellow of the Royal Society. Bath Abbey in England hosts Malthus's tomb. Between 1798 and 1826 Malthus published six editions of his famous treatise, An Essay on the Principle of Population,
updating each edition to incorporate new material, to address
criticism, and to convey changes in his own perspectives on the
subject. He wrote the original text in reaction to the optimism of his
father and his father's associates (notably Rousseau) regarding the
future improvement of society. Malthus also constructed his case as a
specific response to writings of William Godwin (1756 – 1836) and of the Marquis de Condorcet (1743 – 1794). Malthus
regarded ideals of future improvement in the lot of humanity with
skepticism, considering that throughout history a segment of every
human population seemed relegated to poverty. He explained this
phenomenon by arguing that population growth generally expanded in
times and in regions of plenty until the size of the population
relative to the primary resources caused distress: Malthus
also saw that societies through history had experienced at one time or
another epidemics, famines, or wars: events that masked the fundamental
problem of populations overstretching their resource limitations: Malthus argued that two types of checks hold population within resource limits: positive checks, which raise the death rate; and preventive ones,
which lower the birth rate. The positive checks include hunger, disease
and war; the preventive checks, abortion, birth control, prostitution,
postponement of marriage and celibacy. Regarding
possibilities for freeing man from these limits, Malthus argued against
a variety of imaginable solutions. For example, he satirically
criticized the notion that agricultural improvements could expand
without limit: He also commented on the notion that Francis Galton later called eugenics: In the second and subsequent editions Malthus put more emphasis on moral restraint. By that he meant the postponement of marriage until people could support a family, coupled with strict celibacy (sexual abstinence) until that time. "He
went so far as to claim that moral restraint on a wide scale was the
best means — indeed, the only means — of easing the poverty of the lower
classes." This plan appeared consistent with virtue, economic gain and social improvement. This train of thought counterpoints Malthus' stand on public assistance to the poor. He proposed the gradual abolition of poor laws by gradually reducing the number of persons qualifying for relief. Relief in dire distress would come from private charity. He
reasoned that poor relief acted against the longer term interests of
the poor by raising the price of commodities and undermining the
independence and resilience of the peasant. In other words, the poor laws tended to "create the poor which they maintain." It
offended Malthus that critics claimed he lacked a caring attitude
toward the situation of the poor. In the 1798 edition his concern for the poor shows in passages such as the following: In an addition to the 1817 edition he wrote: Some, such as William Farr and Karl Marx, argued
that Malthus did not fully recognize the human capacity to increase
food supply. On this subject, however, Malthus had written: "The main
peculiarity which distinguishes man from other animals, in the means of
his support, is the power which he possesses of very greatly increasing
these means."
As
a believer and a clergyman, Malthus held that God had created an
inexorable tendency to human population growth for a moral purpose,
with the constant harsh threat of poverty and starvation designed to
teach the virtues of hard work and virtuous behaviour. The
issue has occurred to many believers: why should an omnipotent and
caring God permit the existence of wickedness and suffering in the
world? Malthus's theodicy answers
that evil energizes mankind in the struggle for good. "Had population
and food increased in the same ratio, it is probable that man might
never have emerged from the savage state". The
principle of population represented more than the difference between an
arithmetic and a geometric series; it provided the spur for
constructive activity: Malthus saw "the infinite variety of nature" which "cannot exist without inferior parts, or apparent blemishes".
Such diversity and struggle functioned to enable the development of
improved forms. Without such a contest, no species would feel impelled
to improve itself. Without
the test of struggle, and the failure or even death of some, no
successful development of the population as a whole would take place. For Malthus, evil invigorates good and death replenishes life. Malthus
painted a picture of fecundity in the face of enduring resource scarcity, in which adversity and evil can stimulate beneficial
outcomes.
Malthus
saw poverty as a positive check to population growth, believing people
without means less likely to have children whom they could not support. Similarly, as wages increased, the birth rate could be expected to increase while the death rate decreased.
Consequently, wage increases caused populations to grow. Malthus
believed that this inevitably led to economic oscillations between
relative prosperity and distress, though the oscillations were not
always apparent: "A
circumstance which has, perhaps, more than any other, contributed to
conceal this oscillation from common view, is the difference between
the nominal and real price of labour. It very rarely happens that the
nominal price of labour universally falls; but we well know that it
frequently remains the same, while the nominal price of provisions has
been gradually rising. This, indeed, will generally be the case, if the
increase of manufactures and commerce be sufficient to employ the new
labourers that are thrown into the market, and to prevent the increased
supply from lowering the money price. But an increased number of
labourers receiving the same money wages will necessarily, by their
competition, increase the money price of corn. This is, in fact, a real
fall in the price of labour; and, during this period, the condition of
the lower classes of the community must be gradually growing worse. But
the farmers and capitalists are growing rich from the real cheapness of
labour. Their increasing capitals enable them to employ a greater
number of men; and, as the population had probably suffered some check
from the greater difficulty of supporting a family, the demand for
labour, after a certain period, would be great in proportion to the
supply, and its price would of course rise, if left to find its natural
level; and thus the wages of labour, and consequently the condition of
the lower classes of society, might have progressive and retrograde
movements, though the price of labour might never nominally fall. "In
savage life, where there is no regular price of labour, it is little to
be doubted that similar oscillations took place. When population has
increased nearly to the utmost limits of the food, all the preventive
and the positive checks will naturally operate with increased force.
Vicious habits with respect to the sex will be more general, the
exposing of children more frequent, and both the probability and
fatality of wars and epidemics will be considerably greater; and these
causes will probably continue their operation till the population is
sunk below the level of the food; and then the return to comparative
plenty will again produce an increase, and, after a certain period, its
further progress will again be checked by the same causes."
Whereas Malthus's main body of work presents a theory of irremediable, if not untreatable,
scarcity, three of his other works present a theory of surplus: The Nature of Rent, Principles of political economy, and Definitions in Political Economy. The Nature of Rent proposes
rent as a kind of surplus, whereas the previous general definition of
rent portrayed it as a societal economic loss caused by personal
financial gain derived from land scarcity. Principles of Political Economy and Definitions in Political Economy defend the
concept of the general glut, a theory that surplus value can present a
problem. Rent as surplus, and a glut or surplus of goods as problems
differ somewhat or stand in contradistinction to Malthus's earlier
scarcity theory of The Principle of Population.
Malthus
became subject to extreme personal criticism. People who knew nothing
about his private life criticised him both for having no children and
for having too many. In 1819, Shelley,
berating Malthus as a priest, called him "a eunuch and a tyrant"
(though the Church of England does not require celibacy, and Malthus
had married in 1804). Marx
repeated the lie, adding that Malthus had taken the vow of celibacy,
and called him "superficial", "a professional plagiarist", "the agent
of the landed aristocracy", "a paid advocate" and "the principal enemy
of the people." In the 20th century an editor of the Everyman edition of Malthus claimed that Malthus had practised population control by begetting eleven girls. (In fact, Malthus fathered two daughters and one son.) Garrett Hardin provides an overview of these personal insults.
William Godwin criticized Malthus's criticisms of his own arguments in his book On Population (1820). Other theoretical and political critiques of Malthus and Malthusian thinking emerged soon after the publication of the first Essay on Population, most notably in the work of the reformist industrialist Robert Owen, of the essayist William Hazlitt (1807) and of the economist Nassau William Senior, and moralist William Cobbett. Note also True Law of Population (1845) by politician Thomas Doubleday, an adherent of Cobbett's views. John Stuart Mill strongly defended the ideas of Malthus in his 1848 work, Principles of Political Economy (Book II, Chapters 11 - 13). Mill considered the criticisms of Malthus made thus far to have been superficial. The American economist Henry Charles Carey rejected Malthus's argument in his magnum opus of 1858 - 59, The Principles of Social Science.
Carey maintained that the only situation in which the means of
subsistence will determine population growth is one in which a given
society is not introducing new technologies or not adopting
forward thinking governmental policy, and that population regulated
itself in every well governed society, but its pressure on subsistence
characterized the lower stages of civilization. Another strand of opposition to Malthus's ideas started in the middle of the 19th century with the writings of Friedrich Engels (Outlines of a Critique of Political Economy, 1844) and Karl Marx (Capital,
1867). Engels and Marx argued that what Malthus saw as the problem of
the pressure of population on the means of production actually
represented the pressure of the means of production on population. They
thus viewed it in terms of their concept of the reserve army of labour.
In other words, the seeming excess of population that Malthus
attributed to the seemingly innate disposition of the poor to reproduce
beyond their means actually emerged as a product of the very dynamic of capitalist economy. Engels
called Malthus's hypothesis "...the crudest, most barbarous theory that
ever existed, a system of despair which struck down all those beautiful
phrases about love thy neighbour and world citizenship." Engels also predicted that science would solve the problem of an adequate food supply. In the Marxist tradition, Lenin sharply criticized Malthusian theory and its neo-Malthusian version, calling
it a "reactionary doctrine" and "an attempt on the part of bourgeois
ideologists to exonerate capitalism and to prove the inevitability of
privation and misery for the working class under any social system". Some 19th-century economists believed
that improvements in finance, manufacturing and science rendered some
of Malthus's warnings implausible. They had in mind the division and specialization of labour, increased capital investment, and increased productivity of the land due to the introduction of science into agriculture (note the experiments of Justus Liebig and of Sir John Bennet Lawes). Even in the absence of improvement in technology or of increase of capital equipment, an increased supply of labour may have a synergistic effect on productivity that overcomes the law of diminishing returns. As American land economist Henry George observed
with characteristic piquancy in dismissing Malthus: "Both the jayhawk
and the man eat chickens; but the more jayhawks, the fewer chickens,
while the more men, the more chickens." In the 20th century, those who
regarded Malthus as a failed prophet of doom included an editor of Nature, John Maddox. Economist Julian Lincoln Simon has criticised Malthus's conclusions. He notes that despite the predictions of Malthus and of the Neo - Malthusians, massive geometric population growth in the 20th century did not result in a Malthusian catastrophe. Many factors may have contributed: general improvements in farming methods (industrial agriculture), mechanization of work (tractors), the introduction of high - yield varieties of wheat and other plants (Green Revolution), the use of pesticides to control crop pests. Each played a role. The enviro - sceptic Bjørn Lomborg presents data showing that the environment has actually improved. Calories produced per day per capita globally went up 23% between 1960 and 2000, despite the world population doubling
during that period. Anthropologist Eric Ross depicts Malthus's work as
a rationalization of the social inequities produced by the Industrial Revolution, anti - immigration movements, the eugenics movement and the various international development movements.
Malthus belonged amongst a group of high quality intellectuals employed by the
British East India Company. They included both James Mill and his son, John Stuart Mill; Jeremy Bentham had
a major influence on the policy of the company, though not as an
employee. Malthus became a respected member of this elite group, and
his position as professor at the Haileybury training college, which he
held until his death in 1834, gave his theories some influence over Britain's administration of India. As an indication of the group's influence, note Lord William Bentinck's remark to James Mill at a farewell dinner before he left to take up the post of Governor - General of India (in office: 1828 - 1835): "It is you that will be Governor - General". According to Malthus's biographer William Peterson, British Prime Minister William Pitt the Younger (in
office: 1783 – 1801 and 1804 – 1806), upon reading the work of Malthus,
withdrew a Bill he had introduced that called for the extension of Poor Relief. Concerns about Malthus's theory helped promote the idea of a national population census in the UK. Government official John Rickman became instrumental in the carrying out of the first modern British census in 1801, under Pitt's administration. In the 1830s Malthus's writings strongly influenced Whig reforms which overturned Tory paternalism and brought in the Poor Law Amendment Act of 1834. Before
Malthus, commentators had regarded high fertility as an economic
advantage, because it increased the number of workers available to the economy.
Malthus, however, looked at fertility from a new perspective and
convinced most economists that even though high fertility might
increase the gross output, it tended to reduce output per capita. A number of other notable economists, such as David Ricardo (whom Malthus knew personally) and Alfred Marshall admired
Malthus and/or came under his influence. Malthus took pride in the fact
that some of the earliest converts to his population theory included
Archdeacon William Paley, whose Natural Theology first appeared in 1802. Ironically, given Malthus's own opposition to contraception, his work exercised a strong influence on Francis Place (1771 – 1854), whose neo - Malthusian movement became the first to advocate contraception. Place published his Illustrations and Proofs of the Principles of Population in 1822.
At Haileybury, Malthus developed a theory of demand - supply mismatches which he called
gluts. Considered ridiculous at the time, his theory foreshadowed later theories about the Great Depression of the 1930s, and the works of economist and Malthus admirer John Maynard Keynes (1883 – 1946). Malthusian ideas continue to have considerable influence. Paul R. Ehrlich has written several books predicting famine as a result of population increase: The Population Bomb (1968); Population, resources, environment: issues in human ecology (1970, with Anne Ehrlich); The end of affluence (1974, with Anne Ehrlich); The population explosion (1990,
with Anne Ehrlich). In the late 1960s Ehrlich predicted that hundreds
of millions would die from a coming overpopulation crisis in the 1970s.
Other examples of applied Malthusianism include the 1972 book The Limits to Growth (published by the Club of Rome) and the Global 2000 report to the then President of the United States of America Jimmy Carter. Science - fiction author Isaac Asimov issued many appeals for population control reflecting the perspective articulated by people from Robert Malthus through Paul R. Ehrlich. More
recently, a school of "neo - Malthusian" scholars has begun to link
population and economics to a third variable, political change and
political violence, and to show how the variables interact. In the
early 1980s, James Goldstone linked population variables to the English Revolution of 1640 - 1660 and David Lempert devised a model of demographics, economics, and political change in the multi - ethnic country of Mauritius. Goldstone has since modeled other revolutions by looking at demographics and economics and Lempert has explained Stalin's purges and the Russian Revolution of 1917 in terms of demographic factors that drive political economy. Ted Robert Gurr has also modeled political violence, such as in the Palestinian territories and in Rwanda/Congo (two of the world's regions of most rapidly growing population) using
similar variables in several comparative cases. These approaches suggest that political ideology follows demographic forces. Malthus, sometimes regarded as the founding father of modern demography, continues to inspire and influence futuristic visions, such as those of K Eric Drexler relating to space advocacy and molecular nanotechnology. As Drexler put it in Engines of Creation (1986): "In a sense, opening space will burst our limits to growth, since we
know of no end to the universe. Nevertheless, Malthus was essentially
right." The Malthusian growth model now bears Malthus's name. The logistic function of Pierre Francois Verhulst (1804 – 1849) results in the S-curve.
Verhulst developed the logistic growth model favored by so many critics
of the Malthusian growth model in 1838 only after reading Malthus's
essay. Malthus has also inspired retired physics professor, Albert Bartlett, to lecture over 1,500 times on "Arithmetic, Population, and Energy", promoting sustainable living and explaining the mathematics of overpopulation. Despite use of the term "Malthusian catastrophe" by detractors such as economist Julian Simon (1932 – 1998),
Malthus himself did not write that mankind faced an inevitable future
catastrophe. Rather, he offered an evolutionary social theory of
population dynamics as it had acted steadily throughout all previous
history. Eight major points regarding population dynamics appear in the 1798 Essay: Malthusian social theory influenced Herbert Spencer's idea of the survival of the fittest, and the modern ecological - evolutionary social theory of Gerhard Lenski and Marvin Harris. Malthusian ideas have thus contributed to the canon of socioeconomic theory. The first Director - General of UNESCO, Julian Huxley, wrote of The crowded world in his Evolutionary Humanism (1964), calling for a world population policy. Huxley openly criticised communist and Roman Catholic attitudes to birth control, population control and overpopulation. Charles Darwin and Alfred Russel Wallace each
read and acknowledged the role played by Malthus in the development of
their own ideas. Darwin referred to Malthus as "that great philosopher", and
said: "This is the doctrine of Malthus, applied with manifold force to
the animal and vegetable kingdoms, for in this case there can be no
artificial increase of food, and no prudential restraint from
marriage". Darwin also wrote: Wallace stated: Ronald Fisher commented sceptically on Malthusianism as a basis for a theory of natural selection. Fisher did not deny Malthus's basic premises, but emphasised the role of fecundity. John Maynard Smith doubted that famine functioned as the great leveller, as portrayed by Malthus, but he also accepted the basic premises: The epitaph of Malthus in Bath Abbey reads: One
of the best men and truest philosophers of any age or country, raised
by native dignity of mind above the misrepresentation of the ignorant
and the neglect of the great, he lived a serene and happy life devoted
to the pursuit and communication of truth. Supported by a calm but firm conviction of the usefulness of his labors. Content with the approbation of the wise and good. His writings will be a lasting monument of the extent and correctness of his understanding. The
spotless integrity of his principles, the equity and candour of his
nature, his sweetness of temper, urbanity of manners and tenderness of
heart, his benevolence and his piety are still dearer recollections of
his family and friends. Born February 14, 1766 Died December 29, 1834. |