It's the human tendency toward zero-sum thinking. Intuitively makes sense, but highly misleading.Counter-intuitive thinking succeeds more often than not in economics as well as other systems of thought. A grounding in the westernized(Christian) concepts of 'natural law' and the maximization of ordered liberty within the open society is nature's (God's?) plan, anything that strives for the opposite,particularly the de-humanization of the 'other', is anti-human and economically counter-productive.Mercantilism,physiocracy,Marxism-lenninism and Islamicism are interesting examples of this human failing.

The Malthusian belief that scarcity is the natural order of things comes from the Darwinian idea that nature, red and tooth and claw, hones life so that only the fit survive.

As it turns out, mostly the living in easy and just about anything survives.

And breeds rather easily with its neighbor.

No,David. It comes from the basic human inclination to believe that human thought can't cope with the 'rich vein of coal' being tapped out or the simple reality that the potential of each human being is unlimited. People are transformed into liabilities rather than assets.

Sheesh. Don't these guys ever look out the window? We switched to coal after we cut down all the trees and when the coal runs out we'll switch gas and oil and when that runs out ...

Time for a whole new crop of "thinkers."

Of course, it goes with out saying that the "Idiot Curriculum" of our public schools stresses the opposite, that more comes from "knowing less" and that mastering knowledge has been made obsolete by calculators, computers, and certified "educators."

The ideology taught in education schools is that "it is more important to learn how to learn than it is to know 'mere facts.'"

The simple title of the above book shows how insipid this ed school ideology truly is. "Mere facts," and the cascade of facts that latch on to those facts are the foundation of "learning how to learn."

This nation can't survive another 10-15 years of public education.

Well, to defend Malthus he was only using the data points from the 5700 years of known human history. Mathusian theory had nothing to do with Darwinism because Darwin wasn't around yet. It had to do with the historical experience of Europe.

As the population increased in the High Middle Ages, living standards declined. It was only after the Black Death killed 1/3 of Europe that living standards rose again. That was perhaps the most dramatic evidence, but something similar happened during the 17th century which saw the population again decline due to various wars (the English Civil War, the Catholic-Huegonot crisis in France, the Thirty Years War in Germany, the Deluge in Poland) and afterwards living standards surpassed what it was before. One can see the same thing at various points in Roman history.

It's not that Malthus was wrong to think what he did. Instead we need to ask what changed so that his predictions turned out wrong. Erp's suggestion people switch to coal once they use all the trees works well - if your country had large deposits of coal like England did (plus the accumulated technical knowledge that allowed mass extraction). If you did not, like Italy or most of Eastern Europe, you were screwed - which is why the ever increasing populations there, faced with Malthusian standard of living declines, immigrated to the Americas where population density was very low.

If Europe did not have that safety valve, it is unlikely they could have bought themselves enough time to economically develop quick enough to prevent social turmoil. As it was, Europe had turmoil enough.

The problem with assuming that the potential of each human being is unlimted, as Tom C. puts it, that very few societies actually enable people to do so. Enlightenment Europe was able to, but it's important to remember that specific conditions, events, or policies are needed to escape the Malthusian trap.

Exactly! Culture is the deciding factor. Ideologies tending toward demonization of the 'other' or trapped in the habit of characterizing people in classes or sexes or whatever will wallow in backwardness and violence. The idea of liberty, ordered by law and equality before the law unlocks human potential. Malthus was looking in the rear-view mirror, Adam Smith was looking forward.

Chris, I don't suggest that people switch to coal, I suggest that people take their fate into their hands and not stand around like dumb beasts. BTW - I don't know about Italy, but Eastern Europe has coal.

He was wrong even at that point and Darwin based his theory on the falsehood.