Demography.
A book written by Thomas Malthus, a renowned 18th-century British scholar, discussing the future trends of human population growth.
He utilized data he had collected over many years and his academic expertise to propose population-related policies that society should adopt.
At first glance, this might seem like just another scholarly book.
So why has it been labeled as “demonic knowledge” or “an evil argument”?
The reason lies in the fundamental principle on which Malthus built his argument.
[One thing that can be stated with certainty is that, unless some form of restraint is applied to population growth, the world’s population will double every 25 years, increasing at an exponential rate.
As long as there is food available, the population will continue to grow indefinitely, and this increase will itself become a driving force for further growth.
Without continuous control and regulation, the global population will inevitably exceed the limits of available resources.]
Malthus mathematically presented his reasoning with plausible numbers and formulas.
While the population doubles every 25 years, food production can only increase by a limited percentage.
If left unchecked, the gap between population growth and food supply would become insurmountable.
Historically, plagues, wars, and natural disasters had kept the population in check—but there was no guarantee that circumstances would always align favorably.
Thus, Malthus strongly argued that “appropriate measures” should be taken before a catastrophic crisis unfolded.
This idea is commonly known as the Malthusian Trap.
“It sounds crazy, but it was convincing in its own way.”
And terrifyingly enough, his argument was not wrong at the time the book was published.
While advancements in agricultural tools and the development of new farmland helped increase food production, there were limits.
However, the same limitations did not apply to population growth.
With improvements in medicine and infrastructure, mortality rates steadily declined while birth rates remained unchanged.
Population growth only accelerated, showing no signs of slowing down.
It was evident to anyone that this cycle would lead to an inevitable crisis.
[Technological advancements → Increased production/improved sanitation → Population growth → Disasters and wars → Population decline → Increased production/improved sanitation → Population growth → Technological advancements]
A continuous cycle where the quality of life remained low, population numbers kept increasing, and the pattern repeated endlessly.
Real-world examples already existed.
“Just look at our ancestors.”
A prime example of this was Joseon-era Korea.
The population kept growing, but farmland remained the same, leading to frequent issues of poverty and famine in the later years of the dynasty.
People resorted to eating tree bark and roots out of desperation, leaving mountains and fields barren.
In years of drought or extreme cold, tens of thousands perished with ease.
“No country was an exception to this.”
Unless a nation had an abundance of land, the ability to import food, or other exceptional circumstances, every country faced the problem of food shortages caused by population growth.
Malthus’ argument, while extreme, was not mere speculation or the ravings of a madman—it was a realistic social analysis.
Brutal as it may be, this was the rule and law governing human civilization at the time.
“Without scientific advancements, we might still be trapped in the same cycle today.”
If German chemist Fritz Haber had not developed the Haber-Bosch process to synthesize ammonia for chemical fertilizers.
If societies had not discovered that birth rates naturally decline as living standards improve.
Then humanity might still be under the grip of the Malthusian Trap.
This is why his theory continues to have many followers even in the 21st century.
“I understand what you’re saying, but… how exactly is this dangerous? Based on your explanation, it’s just an academic book, isn’t it?”
Kalia’s question was met with a casual shrug from me.
“The danger isn’t in the book itself, but in the impact it can have.”
“Impact?”
“Humans are far more wicked than you might think. If you push them just a little, they’re capable of unimaginable atrocities.”
When Malthus’ theory was first introduced, even though Britain had already started increasing food production with guano-based fertilizers, it still sparked intense debate and widespread negative consequences.
It fueled elitist contempt for the poor, opposition to welfare policies, and imperialistic sentiments.
Under the pretense of preventing famine and securing the future of the nation, society’s lower classes were oppressed and sacrificed.
It wouldn’t be an exaggeration to say that many of the madness-driven events of the 19th and early 20th centuries were triggered, at least in part, by this book.
So what might happen in a world where agriculture still relies on manure and compost?
I don’t know exactly… but I doubt it would be anything positive.
“Humans are wicked, huh… I fully agree with that. But I still don’t quite get what you’re saying.”
“That’s fine. You’ll understand soon enough when you see it for yourself.”
After all, these kinds of things are hard to grasp unless you experience them firsthand.
There’s a reason madness is called madness.
Even those who live through it struggle to make sense of it.
*****
And so, another writing project began.
This time, unlike before, there was no need to twist the original author’s words.
The original text was already brutal enough.
All I needed to do was slightly refine the wording and add commentary to make it easier for readers to understand—just as I had done when writing about On War.
[The exponential growth of population is always constrained in the real world. This is due to a combination of preventive checks and positive checks.]
[Positive checks refer to the increased mortality caused by population pressure, such as poverty, disease, and infanticide.]
[On the other hand, preventive checks are measures taken to avoid population pressure altogether, such as abortion, contraception, and homosexuality.]
[The fundamental cause of these checks is the decline in living standards due to population growth.
While these checks limit explosive population increases, they also ensure that the general standard of living never rises above the bare minimum required for survival.]
[The best way to regulate population without ethical controversy is through moral restraint—delaying marriage voluntarily or practicing sexual abstinence.]
[The fundamental difference between developed and underdeveloped nations is that the former regulate population through moral restraint, while the latter rely on positive checks.]
Malthus genuinely believed that proper population control would lead to a happier life for future generations.
Rather than suffering from overpopulation, starvation, and poverty, he suggested that a little restraint—sexual moderation and self-control—would bring stability.
Since he had no way of knowing that, in the future, ammonia synthesis would allow for the limitless replication of food,Malthus reached what he believed to be the most reasonable conclusion within the limits of his knowledge and era.
Regardless of how people interpreted his ideas or the directions their thoughts took from them.
“He was naive. Far too naive.”
But I had no reason to correct any misunderstandings or set the record straight.
So, I decided to let them believe whatever they wanted.
I would let them shed their pretentious attitudes and embrace their true selves—To boldly justify greed and cruelty under the guise of a noble cause.
[Relief and aid for the poor, paradoxically, amount to nothing more than torment for them.
If we help the impoverished marry earlier and start families, will their financial situations improve?
On the contrary, won’t they just end up with more mouths to feed, making economic independence even more difficult?
An increase in population and consumption among the poor leads to inflation—a phenomenon that benefits neither the poor, nor the working class, nor the middle class.]
[It would be far better to establish institutions where they can work or be trained to sustain themselves.That is a policy that benefits both society and the people.]
[If they were never born in the first place, they would never have to suffer.
Rather than letting children be born into poverty, only to endure a life of despair,wouldn’t it be more ethical to prevent pregnancy altogether?]
Since religious groups might object, I added a few counterarguments to silence them—even slipping in a famous quote from a manga I liked.
If they were going to commit these acts anyway,it would be better for them to do so boldly and without hesitation.
If I wanted to spark change, I had to eliminate anything that might make them hesitate.
“Phew, transcribing all this from memory is more tiring than I thought.”
With that, the seeds were sown.
Since Hispania was far away, it would take time for the effects to manifest.
In the meantime… why not prepare another bombshell?
*****
And so, from the next day onward.
“A special political science lecture series to prepare for the rapidly changing global landscape?”
“Instructor, what is this?”
“It’s a special program designed for ambitious students like yourselves. If you’re interested, feel free to sign up anytime.”
I carefully handpicked and gathered the latent dissidents hidden within the academy.