One of the most difficult concepts for Americans to accept is that there are human beings dedicated to coercive population control and genocide. Many readers will acknowledge that our government is helping to finance the Red Chinese program of forced abortion, forced sterilization, infanticide, and control of the numbers of live births. Most readers will accept the fact that our nation is helping to finance the United Nations' world-wide "family planning program," a form of population control. Most rational men and women, however, find it impossible to believe that such programs are really part of a "master plan" to kill off large segments of the world's population.
I am reputed to be The essay on the principle of population enemy of the Arabs, who wants to have them ejected from Palestine, and so forth. It is not true.
Emotionally, my attitude to the Arabs is the same as to all other nations — polite indifference. Politically, my attitude is determined by two principles. First of all, I consider it utterly impossible to eject the Arabs from Palestine.
There will always be two nations in Palestine — which is good enough for me, provided the Jews become the majority. And secondly, I belong to the group that once drew up the Helsingfors Programmethe programme of national rights for all nationalities living in the same State. In drawing up that programme, we had in mind not only the Jews, but all nations everywhere, and its basis is equality of rights.
This seems to me a fairly peaceful credo. But it is quite another question whether it is always possible to realise a peaceful aim by peaceful means.
Now, after this introduction, we may proceed to the subject. Voluntary Agreement Not Possible. There can be no voluntary agreement between ourselves and the Palestine Arabs.
Not now, nor in the prospective future. I say this with such conviction, not because I want to hurt the moderate Zionists. I do not believe that they will be hurt. Except for those who were born blind, they realised long ago that it is utterly impossible to obtain the voluntary consent of the Palestine Arabs for converting "Palestine" from an Arab country into a country with a Jewish majority.
My readers have a general idea of the history of colonisation in other countries.
I suggest that they consider all the precedents with which they are acquainted, and see whether there is one solitary instance of any colonisation being carried on with the consent of the native population.
There is no such precedent. The native populations, civilised or uncivilised, have always stubbornly resisted the colonists, irrespective of whether they were civilised or savage. And it made no difference whatever whether the colonists behaved decently or not.
Yet the native population fought with the same ferocity against the good colonists as against the bad.
Every native population, civilised or not, regards its lands as its national home, of which it is the sole master, and it wants to retain that mastery always; it will refuse to admit not only new masters but, even new partners or collaborators.
Arabs Not Fools This is equally true of the Arabs. Our Peace-mongers are trying to persuade us that the Arabs are either fools, whom we can deceive by masking our real aims, or that they are corrupt and can be bribed to abandon to us their claim to priority in Palestinein return for cultural and economic advantages.
I repudiate this conception of the Palestinian Arabs. Culturally they are five hundred years behind us, they have neither our endurance nor our determination; but they are just as good psychologists as we are, and their minds have been sharpened like ours by centuries of fine-spun logomachy. We may tell them whatever we like about the innocence of our aims, watering them down and sweetening them with honeyed words to make them palatable, but they know what we want, as well as we know what they do not want.
They feel at least the same instinctive jealous love of Palestine, as the old Aztecs felt for ancient Mexico, and the Sioux for their rolling Prairies. To imagine, as our Arabophiles do, that they will voluntarily consent to the realisation of Zionism, in return for the moral and material conveniences which the Jewish colonist brings with him, is a childish notion, which has at bottom a kind of contempt for the Arab people; it means that they despise the Arab race, which they regard as a corrupt mob that can be bought and sold, and are willing to give up their fatherland for a good railway system.
All Natives Resist Colonists There is no justification for such a belief. It may be that some individual Arabs take bribes. But that does not mean that the Arab people of Palestine as a whole will sell that fervent patriotism that they guard so jealously, and which even the Papuans will never sell.
Every native population in the world resists colonists as long as it has the slightest hope of being able to rid itself of the danger of being colonised.
That is what the Arabs in Palestine are doing, and what they will persist in doing as long as there remains a solitary spark of hope that they will be able to prevent the transformation of "Palestine" into the "Land of Israel.
This belief is utterly unfounded and it has been exploded again and again. I shall recall only one instance of many. A few years ago, when the late Mr. Sokolow was on one of his periodic visits to Palestine, he addressed a meeting on this very question of the "misunderstanding. The Zionists are making a fuss about nothing.
There is no misunderstanding. Sokolow says about the Zionist intentions is true, but the Arabs know that without him.rbert Spencer's Evolutionary Sociology T. Robert Malthus  Malthus’s Population Principle Explained.
By Frank W. Elwell. This essay is a faithful summary of Malthus’s original “Principle of Population.”While nothing will substitute for reading the original essay with an open mind, I hope this summary will go some way toward rehabilitating this man’s reputation. September Remember the essays you had to write in high school?
Topic sentence, introductory paragraph, supporting paragraphs, conclusion. The conclusion being, say, that Ahab in Moby Dick was a Christ-like figure. Oy. Malthus' Essay on the Principle of Population has been the subject of much debate. 19th Century economists accepted The Population Principle as fact.
20th century economists have arrived at such a strong consensus against the Population Principle, that the subject is considered as closed. Also See WHY STEADY STATES ARE IMPOSSIBLE OVERSHOOT LOOP: Evolution Under The Maximum Power Principle The Tragedy of the Commons Science #13, December Vol. no.
pp. DOI: /science The book An Essay on the Principle of Population was first published anonymously in , but the author was soon identified as Thomas Robert iridis-photo-restoration.com book predicted a grim future, as population would increase geometrically, doubling every 25 years, but food production would only grow arithmetically, which would result in famine and starvation, unless births were controlled.
Thomas Robert Malthus FRS (/ ˈ m æ l θ ə s /; 13 February – 23 December ) was an English cleric and scholar, influential in the fields of political economy and demography. Malthus himself used only his middle name, Robert.
In his book An Essay on the Principle of Population, Malthus observed that an increase in a nation's food production improved the well-being of the.