The great demographer and economist Thomas Malthus was 23-years-old the last time a British summer was this rain-soaked, which was back in 1789. The consequences of excessive rainfall in the late 18th century were predictable.
Crops would fail, the harvest would be dismal, food prices would rise and some people would starve. It was no coincidence that the French Revolution broke out the same year.
The price of a loaf of bread rose by 88 per cent in 1789 as a consequence of similar lousy weather. Historians of the Left like Georges Lefebvre used to see this as a prime cause of Louis XVI’s downfall.
Nine years after that rain-soaked summer, Malthus published his Essay on the Principle of Population. It is an essay we would do well to re-read today.
I think he is saying if we wait long enough, there will be a circumstance in which Malthus will be right.
Which someone has been saying for over 200 years now, and we’re still waiting.
Anyone who saw the special on the “little Ice age: big chill” will realilze that the changing climate after the medieval warming period had a lot to do with crop effectiveness. Much of Europe changed to tuber plants like potatoes and rutabega and turnips etc. France, however, refused to change their habits, believing that their methods were best. Cereal grains were still rasied successfully in sub tropic regions (as were grapes for wine — this is when beer really gained popularity).
When the little Ice Age ended, and the current warming period began (about 150 years ago), then ‘cereal grains’ became viable again in northern climes.
Some scientists believe that this warming period is reaching it’s peak with this decade and a new ice age will begin in the next 10 – 50 years. Are they right? cyclical trends show this as being probable. However, it is a tricky thing to predict, when we cannot even predict how many hurricanes will hit in a given year, nor what the accurate percentage of rain chance is for a given WEEK.
Peace
Jim Elliott
Any number of things wrong with Malthus’ predictions:
1. He treated us of we were one big family that shared the harvest. But each family can control its own population growth so the “dismal result” of returning to subsistence is not inevitable.
2. Agricultural crisis in one part of the world is buffered by globalized trade.
3. Technological progress in agriculture has been huge. And that includes being adaptable to changing conditions.
4. As we become richer we are having smaller families, contrary to what Malthus supposed.