Western defenders of China’s one-child policy had no excuse

It isn’t stunning that the Chinese Communist Party, which this week additional loosened its authorized limits on copy, nonetheless doesn’t admit that the “one-child” policy that Deng Xiaoping imposed 4 a long time in the past was a grievous error, tyrannical in principle and brutally oppressive in observe. But the extent to which Western apologists have performed down that ugly actuality is stunning — and shameful.

In 2009, Financial Post columnist Diane Francis declared that “a planetary law, such as China’s one-child policy, is the only way to reverse the disastrous global birthrate.” Four years later, BBC documentarian David Attenborough joined Francis in praising China’s policy, though he regretted “the degree to which it has been enforced” and acknowledged that it “produced all kinds of personal tragedies.”

New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman, who admires what a “one-party autocracy” comparable to China’s can accomplish when it’s “led by a reasonably enlightened group of people,” thinks the one-child policy is an effective instance. In his 2008 e book, “Hot, Flat and Crowded,” Friedman mentioned restrictions on household dimension “probably saved China from a population calamity” and expressed the hope that the Beijing regime would present the identical dictatorial fervor in pursuit of “net-zero buildings” designed to fight local weather change.

In a 2015 Huffington Post essay titled “In Praise of China’s One-Child Policy,” Israeli environmentalist Alon Tal cited the famines that killed an estimated 45 million Chinese within the late Nineteen Fifties and early ’60s as proof that strict inhabitants management was essential. He didn’t point out Chinese Communist supreme chief Mao Zedong’s calamitous Great Leap Forward, which brought about these meals shortages in a misguided try to modernize the Chinese financial system by authorities fiat.

The assumption that coercion was essential to scale back China’s delivery fee is contradicted by tendencies in different growing international locations that by no means adopted such a policy. As Cato Institute Senior Fellow Marian Tupy notes, “plenty of other countries experienced dramatic declines in fertility, which is highly correlated with income and education, and does not necessitate draconian intervention by the government.”

The “personal tragedies” that Attenborough lamented weren’t, as he appears to suppose, an unlucky aspect impact of an in any other case enlightened policy. They had been essential to implement the federal government’s dictates, which individuals predictably resisted.

The enforcement measures, which assorted extensively by time and place, included “family-planning contracts,” delivery permits, gynecological surveillance, fines that would quantity to a number of years of earnings, property confiscation, residence demolitions, beatings, arbitrary detention, kidnapping of unauthorized youngsters, denial of employment and authorities companies and compelled abortions, sterilizations and IUD insertions.

While not all these strategies had been formally blessed by the central authorities, Brookings Institution scholar Wang Feng noticed, the nationwide policy was “so extreme that it emboldened local officials to act so inhumanely.”

In her 2019 documentary, “One-Child Nation,” Nanfu Wang returns to the farming village in Jiangxi province the place she was raised and talks to an uncle and an aunt who mournfully keep in mind the toddler daughters they felt compelled to desert. Wang’s grandfather says he had to dissuade native officers from sterilizing her mom after Wang was born.

A former family-planning official tells Wang that “sometimes pregnant women tried to run away” from pressured abortions, typically carried out at eight or 9 months, and “we had to chase after them.” A midwife estimates that she carried out 50,000 to 60,000 sterilizations and abortions.

“Many I induced alive and killed,” the midwife says. “My hand trembled doing it.”

In 2011, however the horrific penalties of China’s reproductive controls, then-Vice President Joe Biden informed college students at Sichuan University that “your policy” is “one which I fully understand” and “I’m not second-guessing.” The downside, Biden mentioned, was that it had led to a rising ratio of retirees to staff, which was “not sustainable.”

The Chinese authorities now appears to agree with Biden. But the problematic demographic outcomes of China’s experiment in coercive “family planning,” which embody a gender imbalance in addition to an getting older inhabitants, are hardly the worst factor that may be mentioned about it.

Jacob Sullum is a senior editor of Reason.

Twitter: @JacobSullum

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.