The Malthusian Question
Was the 18th-century economist right all along — just early?
The Original Thesis: In 1798, Malthus argued that human population grows exponentially while food production grows linearly. Without "checks" — famine, disease, war, or voluntary restraint — population would inevitably outstrip resources, leading to widespread misery.
Why He Seemed Wrong: The Industrial Revolution, Green Revolution, and fossil fuels temporarily broke the trap. We produced more food faster than population grew. For 200 years, optimists declared Malthus debunked.
Why He May Be Right: Those productivity gains came from one-time sources: fossil fuels (depleting), aquifers (draining), topsoil (eroding), and biodiversity (collapsing). We didn't escape the trap — we borrowed against it. The bill is coming due.
The Modern Twist: Malthus predicted population would be checked by scarcity. What's actually happening is stranger: prosperity itself is the check. The richer societies become, the fewer children they have. We may decline not from having too little, but from wanting too little.
The Story So Far
Historical Checkpoints
What Caused the Explosion (1800–2000)
The Uncomfortable Truths
The Fertility Collapse
The Biological Crisis
The Economic Time Bomb
The Psychological Collapse
The Antibiotic Apocalypse
The Water & Soil Crisis
Ecosystem Collapse
The Nuclear Precipice
The Next Pandemic
The Feedback Loops
These crises don't exist in isolation. They amplify each other.