File spoon-archives/marxism-thaxis.archive/marxism-thaxis_1998/marxism-thaxis.9804, message 145

Date: Thu, 2 Apr 1998 10:29:58 +0200
Subject: M-TH: Kids and Malthus

Nancy writes:

>Human beings are indeed "sexual" animals in that genes are mixed during
>reproduction (the biological definition), but I protest the idea that sex is
>an instinct we can do nothing about, and that "children come regardless of
>our conscious wishes in the matter."

Protest away. If children came because of our conscious desire and
decisions to have them, we wouldn't be here. In present-day society we have
a greater degree of control than ever before, but this doesn't affect the
instinctual character of sex.

I've also given examples of ways in which we can do things about
instinctual sex by learning how to handle it.

It's like eating and breathing. It's too important to be left to
consciously determined choices. We can learn to eat better and more
enjoyably. People who try to wish away eating from humanity kil themselves
in the process. Very few people even bother to try to wish away breathing.
In communist society all the present repressive crap we see destroying
people's enjoyment of eating and sex will be blown away, and people will be
as little concerned with wishing it away as they are now with wishing away

Yoshie's hangups are the product of imperialist repression and its
contradictions, historically determined. Her attempts to formulate them as
eternal verities weaken her critical impact and ability to change things in
a concrete way here and now.

>This idea, also known as "natural
>fertility," is the basis of Malthusian logic, which itself is the basis of
>the ideological war against the victims of environmental degradation in the
>Third World.

There is no logic to Malthusianism. Any reactionary ideology can pick on
some element of reality, isolate and distort it beyond proportion and
reason, but this doesn't necessarily invalidate the element of reality thus
distorted. Science decides what's real, not the reactionary ideology. The
Malthusian idea of natural fertility is that it can't be controlled at all,
which is obvious crap.

Perhaps we should have a list headcount.

How many people think children are all the result of consciously planned
decisions to have them??



>The bourgeoise demographers characterize the reproductive behavior of modern
>industrialized society as "controlled fertility behavior," as compared to
>the "natural fertility" which prevailed until the end of the 18th century.
>The assumption is made that pre-modern societies had no birth control, which
>is not so. Modern contraceptives, the education and employment of women, and
>the increase in the purchase of consumer goods, all were credited with
>stopping the population increase of Europe in the 19th century, but Europe
>was exporting its poor to the colonies during this time. The same did not
>happen in the South. (Ecofeminism, Mies & Shiva, pp. 285-287)
>     --- from list ---

     --- from list ---


Driftline Main Page


Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005