My first thought is that you do need someone to do the demographics, because I'm not sure whether huge overpopulation actually could be combined with significantly minority fertility. It sounds like a biological backlash in and of itself.
Supposing it to be possible, though, I think you need to address two things before you dig into the social ramifications of crowding/reproduction. One, why did technology fail so spectacularly? While it's true that there's only so much raw material to go around, exceeding the carrying capacity of a whole planet requires that we not be able to refine and expand our caloric production, and we're already doing that every year. That's where Malthus went wrong, after all. He assumed no technological advances in production at all. It's why we've already, I believe, overshot his estimated limit for population. So, why has technology not been able to keep up in this world?
Two, why is there a shortage of birth control? Not just the Pill, but all the other forms of getting rid of unwanted children (toxins, mechanical abortion, abandonment/exposure, killing the mother). Are there social prohibitions against taking steps like that? And, if so, why have they persisted in face of such overcrowding?
That said, what seems most likely to me is a class divide. The upper class, having the luxury of proper medical care, might treat the process of reproduction as a career choice, those who don't make that choice being voluntarily sterilized. The class identification could be strong enough to enable that kind of system, centered around the reproducers despite them being outside the channels of material power.
The lower class, not having access to the medical tech to correct mistaken conceptions, might have to resort to more strenuous methods of controlling the fertile members. Shunning, for example. Death for repeat offenders. Not as a government policy, but as a social reaction. All really effective methods of controlling people come from inside, not outside; they get you doing it to yourself.
I suspect there would be two contradictory pressures. One, the desire to have, or participate in the production of, children. The other, to not endanger everyone's survival by producing any more children. I could see a lot of attention focusing on the fertile people. Whether it wound up expressed as privilege or supression would depend on a lot of other factors, I think.
no subject
Date: 22 Nov 2004 05:39 pm (UTC)Supposing it to be possible, though, I think you need to address two things before you dig into the social ramifications of crowding/reproduction. One, why did technology fail so spectacularly? While it's true that there's only so much raw material to go around, exceeding the carrying capacity of a whole planet requires that we not be able to refine and expand our caloric production, and we're already doing that every year. That's where Malthus went wrong, after all. He assumed no technological advances in production at all. It's why we've already, I believe, overshot his estimated limit for population. So, why has technology not been able to keep up in this world?
Two, why is there a shortage of birth control? Not just the Pill, but all the other forms of getting rid of unwanted children (toxins, mechanical abortion, abandonment/exposure, killing the mother). Are there social prohibitions against taking steps like that? And, if so, why have they persisted in face of such overcrowding?
That said, what seems most likely to me is a class divide. The upper class, having the luxury of proper medical care, might treat the process of reproduction as a career choice, those who don't make that choice being voluntarily sterilized. The class identification could be strong enough to enable that kind of system, centered around the reproducers despite them being outside the channels of material power.
The lower class, not having access to the medical tech to correct mistaken conceptions, might have to resort to more strenuous methods of controlling the fertile members. Shunning, for example. Death for repeat offenders. Not as a government policy, but as a social reaction. All really effective methods of controlling people come from inside, not outside; they get you doing it to yourself.
I suspect there would be two contradictory pressures. One, the desire to have, or participate in the production of, children. The other, to not endanger everyone's survival by producing any more children. I could see a lot of attention focusing on the fertile people. Whether it wound up expressed as privilege or supression would depend on a lot of other factors, I think.