|
|
|
|
Articles: My Thoughts | Population problem of India
- Prof. Narasimham Brahmandam
| |
Poser:
The economists of the world, and, naturally therefore, our economists have come to the conclusion that the rate of growth of our population is the single strongest impediment to or prosperity.
Reaction:
When you cannot use your growing population for increased production, it is common sense that you should restrict it and eliminate future claimants for a share in the meager GNP. Dividing the available wealth among fewer people would increase the average wealth per capita.
Poser:
But firm measures to enforce birth control have wrecked a government and the successor governments dared not think of any thing other than persuasion and incentives.
Reaction:
The incentives are producing the opposite effect. When a deficit government, sniffing every nook for something it can tax, and unwilling to squander money on anything that does not get votes, liberally announces handsome amounts to those who sterilize themselves, what would be the reaction?
If the person is a farmer, he would say to himself, “This government has surely some dirty trick up its sleeves. What is it that they are bribing me for? Let me think. If I have more sons, they will work on my farm with all their heart as owners of the land and beneficiaries of the produce. And they are cheap. If I stop with two children, may be one of them is a daughter, I shall have to hire perfunctory labor at rates and under conditions fixed by the government. The labor will be obliged to the government (i.e., the ruling party) and not to me. While my costs go up, the party will collect the votes. Why, the cat is out of the bag!”
If the person is a businessman, more sons mean more reliable associates and branch managers. If he is a craftsman, more dedicated work hands. Even a beggar benefits by sending his children to more places to beg. How then do you expect monetary incentives to deliver the goods?
Poser:
But the fashion is catching on. It may succeed in a couple of decades.
Reaction:
Yes. The fashion is catching on; but only among the educated classes seeking employment in government or private organizations, who have nothing to lose or gain by the number of progeny. (And among the libertines who do not want to be entangled in the fruits of their follies). The open accessibility of the devices also helps erring youth to hide their sin. It is making a deep dent into the traditional high pedestal of chastity of women.
Poser:
Should we, then, abandon all measures against the control of population?
Reaction:
On the other hand, these futile and apologetic methods should be abandoned. The incentives give the impression that the person agreeing to be sterilized is doing a great favour to the Nation. The government is doing the right thing the wrong way.
Here is a solution. Stop the money incentives. Let the competent demographers decide whether a two-child or one-child norm gives an adequate control of population. Let that be our national target which every patriotic citizen shall respect. Anyone who crosses the limit, by corollary, is punishable. We expect the jawan to lay down his life for the country. Is it too much of a sacrifice for a civilian at least to limit his progeny? Each couple shall be given a card with the information of how many children they already have. When another child is born, the card is to be produced before the registrar who will note that it is an extra child. An ordinance shall be issued that any extra child born after the date of issue of the card shall cease to be regarded as a citizen of the nation and will be deprived of all the privileges of a citizen.
Poser:
What will the deprivation of citizenship mean in practical terms? Hundreds of people from our neighbouring countries are being pushed into our territory almost everyday. Though they are not technically our citizens, they seem to be getting on well and even nurtured as vote banks of certain political parties. In such a country where everyone except the natives are treated as a privileged class, what deprivation can we think of for these non-citizens born of our own citizens?
Reaction:
They will not be entitled to free primary education, to loans or scholarships for studies, to employment in government or public enterprises, banks etc., to licences for enterprises, electricity or anything the government and civic bodies provide for the citizens. They will not be able to seek justice in courts except for criminal injury. And, of course, they cannot vote or contest elections.
Poser:
Will not such a measure invoke a revolt by the people?
Reaction:
Not unless the politicians incite them. It has been done in China. Further, the people will not see it as a great deprivation because, today, these facilities are not in easy reach even to the so called citizens of the country. They will not also take it seriously but will dismiss it as another statute on paper like the anti-dowry act or the minimum marriageable age Act. And they know that no law can be implemented 100 percent in a people’s government. Further, there is no ban on having more children. If they can fend for themselves, they will not be harassed. Conscientious and religious objectors to birth control can choose between divine religious dictates, if any, and the benefits of mundane citizenship. The choice is theirs.
| Read 5 Comment(s) posted so far on this Article!
| |
|
|
|
 |
| Advertisements |
|
|
|
|
| Advertisements |
|
