“We bred out of control to absolutely bonkers amounts, and taking X% of the earths resources is non-negotiable”?
Imagine if, in the face of climate change, the US response was a movement of 6-8 children per woman. What would that US policy be called?
The proportion of world population from India and China has been almost constant throughout history. They have not "bred more" than the rest of the world.
6-8 children was the norm even in developed countries in the past, economic prosperity and education changed that. European colonization actively prevented both from occurring in these countries, keeping birth rate high.
Post independence, both countries have decreased birth rates drastically, India is at replacement and still decreasing, China below replacement.
Stop using that stupid racist argument.
I would say that's on the low end. Jean Chrétien was the prime minister of Canada from 1993 to 2003, so politically contemporary with George W. Bush. He was born 18th of 19 children.
India's population grew because of access to healthcare & increasing life expectancy education, quality of life etc. It is a big country but had a stunted growth till 50s because the life expectancy was <40 years & the poverty gave a double whammy. What can you expect of comforts or wastage, if you were going to school to have a decent breakfast, which was otherwise unavailable (case in point: recollections of my parents elementary school years)
Countries go through population cycles i.e rapid growth, stagnation or declines. The US is ticking, at the moment, faster than China for example (birth + immigration). India touched 1 billion when I was 8. I am going to be 40 soon. Since then it has added only 300 million, not doubled. Talking of resources, I am not aware of resource utilization efficiency, but the gross usage of power & commodities is way higher in developed countries as compared to India or China (mainly due to multiple automobiles, enhanced consumerism, HVAC being omnipresent). Can you imagine how much energy will be consumed in US when one day it hits 1 billion people? I hope you reserve this same sentiment for US then.
I have lived in 5 countries including US, India and China & worked close to the energy sector to speak from experience. Right now the developing countries need to bring almost everyone out of poverty & malnutrition. These arent people who have homelessness by choice (drugs, gambling etc) but by lack of resources for generations. These problems needs cheap energy, which either has to come from sources like coal or highly subsidized from West (Note: It isn't).
I would approach this problem with some sensitivity & humanity if I were in your shoes.
India has made family planning widely available, through far less harsh measures.
Globally, population growth peaked in 1969, and has fallen fairly consistently since.
The largest population growth presently is in Africa, not Asia. Mostly in countries which are desperately poor and which have low past and present carbon emissions.
And, as noted, India and China's populations have historically been high. As have their relative shares of global GDP prior to the industrialised era (as calculated in reconstructions, largely by Angus Maddison at the University of Gronigen).
https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/#pastfuture
https://www.rug.nl/ggdc/historicaldevelopment/maddison/?lang...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_and_d...
And yes the well-being of your Citizens is the only justification a Government needs (maybe hard to understand as a US citizen)
>Imagine if, in the face of climate change, the US response was a movement of 6-8 children per woman.
Imagine India would have two Cars per household like the US, and at least one of them needs to be a SUV, that's not whataboutism, it about not cleaning our own house before pointing fingers to others.
Western Europe is just about the size of India. And had historically low populations because of the harsh winters.