Many people in the United States and around the world view the threat of overpopulation as one of the most fundamental issues plaguing humanity, and probably for good reason: The world population has grown more in the past 54 years than during the entirety of human history preceding that period.
Much of this growth has occurred in Asian countries that are still in the process of industrializing. Consequently the effects of overpopulation have been felt the hardest in countries such as India, China and Bangladesh.
But there is good news: Just as the rate of population growth has increased rapidly in many countries, the total fertility rate (average number of live births per woman) on a global scale has decreased dramatically. From 1963 to 2013, the total global fertility rate decreased from 5 to 2.45 live births per woman and it is still on the decline.
According to the most recent population projections by the United Nations, decrease in population growth indicates that the world population is expected to tether off at around 11 billion by the end of this century.
Interestingly, this decrease of population growth rate in the highly populated Asian countries has been coupled with an increase in average life expectancy and an increase in GDP per capita, albeit the latter is by no means up to par with the standards of western nations.
Given that throughout history the tendency of nations is to experience a rapid population increase, an increase in industrialization, an increase in economic growth and finally a decrease in average fertility rate, what is it that causes the final segment in that trend?
Why is it that economic growth and industrialization are significantly correlated with a decrease in fertility rate? Studies have shown that there is one factor that is of indispensable importance in easing localized overpopulation and the problems associated with it: the empowerment of women, particularly ensuring women’s reproductive rights.
One of the major criticisms the famous journalist Christopher Hitchens had with Mother Teresa was her dogmatic opposition to contraception. On this note, Hitchens said in a speech, “[Mother Teresa] spent her life opposing the only known cure for poverty, which is the empowerment of women and the emancipation of them from a livestock version of compulsory reproduction.”
Although his conclusions about Mother Teresa were likely motivated by political factors, the fact still remains that an increase in family planning and the global empowerment of women is easily one of the most important issues that humanity must tackle to ensure a sustainable future.
This is my major criticism of the feminist movement in the western world. Although the struggle for gender equality in the places such as the U.S. is far from over, the widespread academic emphasis on issues such as feminism is inconsiderate to women around the world, especially considering that their empowerment is indispensable aspect of a better world for both men and women.
To be fair, it is much easier to criticize what is closer to home, and it is difficult to establish an egalitarian society for women in the third world in the void of one in the first world. Moreover, there are many problems that the developing world faces that are far worse than those in the U.S., despite the fact that national political advocates spend much more energy encouraging improved conditions for Americans than they do for the third world.
However, politicians are bound to their constituents; if they want to spend American resources solving international issues, there had better be something in it for Americans other than altruism. Still, the U.S. leads the world in international aid by a considerable margin.
Feminists are not accountable to people who elect them, they are accountable to women. And the majority of women in developing and undeveloped counties are regularly subjected to horrors unimaginable in the western world.
Moreover, the victories that could be made for gender equality (not to mention overall poverty and suffering reduction) for the amount of effort expended are far greater abroad than they are at home. This is an opportunity that global feminists such as Hillary Clinton haven’t missed but many others have.