View More pictures..
Shifting lines
Population control policy
All this reminiscence has been triggered by the proposed Population Control Policy, which has been causing ripples over the last couple of years. Various BJP leaders have spoken of the need to bring in a stringent law for population control. Several draft Bills have been introduced as Private Member’s Bills. Among the proposals is a watchdog committee to monitor population, based on the naive assumption that since the population of India is likely to exceed the population of China in the near future, it is necessary to “control” it through punitive legislation.
The proposed ideas include a simplistic mix of incentives and disincentives. Couples with two or fewer living children, it is suggested, will be entitled to (a) free treatment in public health centres (PHCs); (b) priority in promotion; and (c) higher education scholarships for their children. If a couple has more than two living children, neither husband nor wife shall be entitled to (a) contest elections to government bodies; (b) exercise their franchise; (c) get benefits of government schemes; (d) government jobs; (e) government scholarships; or (f) be engaged in a government institution.
There is no consideration for individual liberties in the proposal. Besides, “not being able to exercise franchise”, an element insidiously slipped in, violates the constitutional guarantee of universal franchise.
The idea of a stringent population policy may sound arithmetically appealing, but it entirely lacks a sociological grasp of the direct correspondence between the lack of family feeling and the level of violence in society. Even now, poorer sections of Indian society negotiate adverse economic and psychological situations by invariably falling back on the extended family for support.
It is true that the population is increasing and will soon match China’s level, which was restricted through a policy of disincentives. However, China’s “one child” policy has resulted in female infanticide and gender imbalance, with nearly 30 million males more than females.
India has arrived at its present 2.1 fertility rate from 5.9 in 1950, 5.7 in 1960, 4.9 in 1970, 4.2 in 1980, 3.4 in 1990, and 2.8 in 2000. It was accomplished not by any “stringent population law” but through gender empowerment, active contraception promotion, and educating people irrespective of religion or gender. A government obsessed with rapid privatisation of education and healthcare is a greater risk for population numbers than fertility rates.
India’s Infant Mortality Rate for 2022 is 27.695 (deaths per 1,000 born). It was 30.924 in 2019, 29.848 in 2020, and 28.771 in 2021. We are also facing the impact of climate change. Considering all these facts, our present level of “2.1” FR calls for no drastic measures.
The Hindu population
The BJP and RSS propaganda about Muslims outnumbering Hindus in India is as much a fabulation as is their claim that Muslims and Catholic Christians produce more children. The statistics of populations in various countries—Christian, Muslim, Buddhists—show that poverty and lack of education and healthcare are the reasons for excessive population growth. Theologies do not have any direct relation to the human desire to regenerate and maintain populations.
Perhaps we need to begin a fresh debate on the relationship between family structure and growing levels of violence. It calls for a regime that will appreciate love rather than scorn. Quite ironically, the non-state organisation calling itself a “parivar”, which is guiding the policy footsteps of the government, has not quite grasped how much the “great Indian family” is important for safeguarding peace in India’s multicultural, multilingual, and multireligious society—something that millions of illiterate Akkas in Indian villages know so well. Three cheers for the great Indian parivar.
Ganesh Devy is a cultural activist and founder of Dakshinayana.
(This story was published in the print edition of Frontline magazine dated Feb 10, 2023.)