What does responsible population growth look like in practice? | Opinion

Mother’s Day seems an appropriate time to think about the so-called baby bust and the value of growth. Experts warn of a “depopulation bomb,” worrying that declining birth rates will produce social dislocation and national decline.

In a recent column, Washington Post columnist George Will fretted that “America is losing its most valuable resource: people.” Similar fears exist in Canada, Japan and Europe.

A declining population may not be able to care for the elderly or keep the economy running. The population bust also intersects with immigration policy: A nation with a declining population may need more immigrants. But immigration opponents would rather encourage more “native” births.

Vice President JD Vance has said, “I want more babies in the United States of America.” One policy proposal is to offer cash incentives, like “Trump Accounts” that set money aside for children.

Another pro-natal idea is abortion bans. A legislator in Wyoming, State Sen. Evie Brennan, recently explained the state’s abortion restrictions in these terms: “Without an up-and-coming population that grows up here that wants to stay here, then we just become a stagnant or an aging/dying state.”

But is it true that if populations don’t grow they are dying? This is an obvious false dilemma, as if there are only two options: growth or death. Stability is also a possibility, and growth is not always good.

The Trump era celebrates bigness: an oversized White House ballroom, a gigantic triumphal arch and even legislation named the “One, Big, Beautiful Bill.” But greed and envy are growth-related vices, and at some point, it is wise to say enough is enough.

Growth becomes destructive when booming populations exceed the carrying capacity of the land. Bad growth jams more students into crowded classrooms while shoving more cars onto crowded freeways.

There are also graceful ways to shrink, slow down and simplify. Wisdom acknowledges that “small is beautiful,” and “less is more.” The art of graceful living is more about downsizing than expanding. It is good to know when to withdraw, remain silent and keep still.

But modern Americans tend to think that growth is always good. The American philosopher John Dewey celebrated growth, seeing it as the primary goal of morality and as an active and unending process of transformation. He described life itself as “an ever-enduring process of perfecting, maturing and refining.”

Dewey understood education as a process of guided growth, conducted across a lifetime. And he viewed democracy as a system dedicated to the “all-around growth of every member of society.”

Dewey’s philosophy is inspiring and typically American. But we misunderstand him if we think that growth is only about making things bigger or faster. Wise growth is not measured as increasing numbers on a scale. A city that grows without limit, for example, eventually becomes unlivable.

Growth is also a process of intensification. We misunderstand the growth of love if we think in quantitative terms. True love grows by deepening and ripening. Similarly, we grow in wisdom in ways that are not quantifiable or overt.

What matters, then, with regard to population, is not the number of people but how well they live. It is not true that more people are better. With regard to people, quantity is less important than quality. We should want better, kinder and wiser human beings rather than more people.

This does not imply some kind of eugenic plan that selects among types of people. Rather, the point is to ripen and deepen our humanity by encouraging wisdom and virtue.

Smart growth creates sensible structures that contribute to justice and well-being. We do this by supporting mothers and families in ways that contribute to the intellectual, moral and social growth of children.

Andrew Fiala is a professor of philosophy and director of The Ethics Center at Fresno State.