Many readers questioned the wisdom of my column in PB's 24th issue because ionstead of accepting the usual view of birth control to eradicate poverty I seem to support the opposite view. I told them that as long as facts support my stand I cannot but speak for the group that unfairly gets blamed whenever economic crisis knocks at the nation's door. The group I refer to belong to Pinoys living below the poverty line because they have been, for the past decades, the target of the birth control efforts of the United Nations' Population Commission which influence the policies of governments and private groups. To these groups, preventing the poor of the underleveloped countries to procreate is the main solution to poverty.

     The above solution, based on the Malthusian theory, seems to be a reaction to the oil crisis of the 1970s and the famine in parts of Sahel in Africa in the 1980s. Thus the earlier discarded Malthusian theory seemed to have gained new adherents because within the two decades, the theory seemed to have proven that human numbers had outstripped the ability to sustain themselves, not only with regard to food, but also with regard to resources such as oil, minerals, land, and water. In relation to the two crisis, in 1968, two influential 'neo-Malthusian' works were published, reintroducing the language of limits into the population debate. Ever since Paul Ehrlich's Population Bomb (1968) and Garrett Hardin's "Tragedy of the Commons" (1968), warnings about the limits of sustenance, of resources, food, energy, land, and the environment, have flown fast and furious. Vociferous in their attacks on population growth, neo-Malthusians have captured the attention of the popular media and politicians alike. These attacks include the following:

• Paul Ehrlich claimed in 1968 that 'hundreds of millions' of people would die of starvation by the 1970s.
• that among the millions, 65 million Americans would starve,
• the population of the US would decline by 22.6 million persons,
• that England would cease to exist by 2000.
• Lester Brown, of the Worldwatch Institute, has for years foretold famine. As recently as September 1998, he argued that the 'frontiers of agricultural settlement have disappeared [and] future growth in grain production must come almost entirely from raising land productivity. Unfortunately this is becoming more difficult."

     These attacks resulted in the drastic decline of populations. Several years ago, the US birthrate hit a record and began to decline. From 3.7 births per woman - well over the 2.1 required to maintain a level population - its birthrate has been falling ever since. It is now hovering just below replacement rate.

     In Europe, birth rates are even lower. As a consequence, the population of Europe will have fallen to what it was in 1950 by 2050. This is happening all over the world - women are having fewer children. It's happening in Brazil; it's happening in China, India and Japan. It's even happening in the Middle East. Wherever there is a rapid urbanization, education for women and visions of urban affluence, birthrate has been falling.

     Much to the chagrin of developed nations, the dire predictions did not materialize and instead people produce more. Statistical data gathered crop yeilds disprove the attacks. For instance, the 1999 Human Development Report, published by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) pointed out that "despite rapid population growth, food production per capita increased by nearly 25% during 1990-1997. The per capita daily supply of calories rose from less than 2,500 to 2,750 and that of protien from 71 grams to 76." In a similar fashion, the World Bank devoted a segment of its Development Report to refer to the Green Revolution as a 'paradigm' for development and knowledge-sharing. It is though human ingenuity, the World Bank argues, that food production has stayed ahead of population growth; indeed, productivity gains in cereals such as rice, maize and wheat have been dramatic.

     After realizing their folly on blindly following the Malthusian theory, developed countries experiencing zero growth are now offering mutiple incentives to families (with no success) fro them to produce children. (See related article.) Facts prove that what they are doing will be fruitless. For urbanization in itself is already a form of population control.

     Self-preservation is therfore the main reason why the rich (rich countries, rich individuals or the north) want to control the poor's population. In the not-so-distant future, sons of the poor will take over the management of the world.

     Why am I telling YOU, the OFWs, these facts? I want YOU to know the real issues so that you will be more optimistic of and aggressive for your country's future and not let the doomsayers of the rich darken your minds and your hearts. Always remember that not even God has given richer people or nations the right to impose their culture of death on the poor. Lastly, pray and work hard so that soon the first rays of the bright economic dawn will be upon your motherland.