One-child policy – Welcome liberalization does not come without risk

One-child policy – Welcome liberalization does not comewithout risk

By David Furguson (People's Daily Online) 09:56, November 26, 2013

Email|Print|Comments

twitter

facebook

Sina Microblog

From November 9-12, the Third Plenary Session of the 18th Central Committee of theCommunist Party (3rd Plenum) took place. China has an endearing, if rather trying habit,of insisting that events in the country have “captured the attention of the world”. But inthis case, there is no subjective bias. There has been a huge amount of internationalspeculation and comment on the hundreds of measures that were discussed and announcedin Beijing last week - much of it focused on economic reform at both national and local level.

But one that has attracted more attention than most, both in China and elsewhere, is asocial measure – the change to the one-child policy. In future, couples with one spouse whois an only child will be allowed to have two children.

The one-child policy has long been a favorite stick for western critics to beat the back ofChina. It is portrayed as illiberal in purpose, draconian in extent, and cruel inimplementation.

Part of this is due to simple ignorance. The one-child policy did not come into force until1979, at the same time as the start of China’s reform and opening up. Many foreign criticsare simply unaware of the wide range of exemptions to the policy – for ethnic minorities,for rural families whose first child is a girl or is handicapped in some way, for families inwhich both spouses themselves are only children. In 2007 Zhang Weiqing, Minister forPopulation Planning, released figures indicating that almost two-thirds of families benefitedfrom exemptions to the rule.

A second aspect of the problem is a more willful misrepresentation. Another favorite targetof China’s critics which is often tied to the one-child policy is the Hukou system, whichlimits the extent to which people can migrate and settle within the country. Together,these are seen as twin pillars of oppression.

The truth is that together they have played the role of foundation stones of the stabilitythat has helped China to enjoy its unprecedented period of economic growth. One does nothave far to look to see the consequences of uncontrolled population growth and unmanagedmigration – how many of India’s major metropolises are surrounded by a sprawlingcardboard slumdog shanty-town filled with the desperate poor?

Even the poorest in China at least have the capability to sustain themselves throughsubsistence farming. It is understandable that any individual will want to do whatever hecan to better himself, but what would be gained by allowing such people to desert thecountryside in their millions and make their way to the cities in pursuit of ‘a better life’which at the current state of China’s development is an illusion? Jobs for the minimal skillsthey have to offer are few and far between. It takes hundreds of generations to learn howto farm, but you can forget how to do it in one. Even if you could provide those destituteIndians with land to till, the tools to work it, and seed to sow, how likely is it that theywould know what to do with them?

【1】【2】【3】