technology

I think Malthusianism is probably an unfair comparison, as that's more like a doomerist political philosophy, where the one-child-policy is more a temporary solution to a short-term problem.

Not that I agree with the one-child-policy or anything, but having grown up in Amerikkka where every gringo thinks it's their God-given right to have unlimmited babies (in accordance ), and many even seem to believe it's a personal insult to them if I decide to have zero (or they just don't believe I have to the right to make that choice), it does seem like perhaps the English speaking world is primed to think it's a far more extreme policy than it really is, or at least there's a lot of looking outwards and refusing to crit inwards on this. Because you know deep down the purpose of having large numbers of kids seems to boil down to treating them like property.

I wouldn't say the one-child-policy right, but I've also never seen an example of critic doing anything more than a gut-reaction to a surface level understanding of the issue (and you know, therefore Marx was wrong about the price of linen or w/e), while at the same time, even if only by accident, probably proping up Western Values higher than Principles. I've never seen a critic propose a better solution that wasn't the hand wavey just-dont-buy-20k-per-year-of-starbucks type of domestic policy.

But I'd think that would make a great effort post if someone wanted to cook.

Does that hold true with modern mechanized agriculture?

That's a very good question, I don't know. I guess we'll never know what would have happened had they not had the one-child policy, but AFAIK it was trying to avoid the pitfalls of industrialisation where other nations failed.