* 「(先進諸国における)合計特殊出生率の推移」を参照
全ての西欧諸国の'御用モラリスト'たちは,'訓戒'(説教)や'感傷的な言葉'によって,この問題を扱おうと努力してきた。彼らは,一方では,生まれた子供が将来健康で幸福になれるかどうか関係なく,神が望むだけ,多くの子供を持つことは,すべての夫婦の義務であると主張する。他方では,男性の聖職者たちは,母になることは'神聖な喜び'であるとしゃべりまくり,病気で貧乏に悩む幼児のいる大家族は幸福の源であると偽って言う。そこへ国家も割り込んできて,大勢の雑兵(ぞうひょう)が必要である(注:「命をかけて国を守る=敵と戦う若い人が少ないのは国家にとってゆゆしき事態である,という軍国主義者の主張のラッセルらしい表現か。cannon fodder: 大砲の餌食になるだけの雑兵/crop:群れ a large crop of new students),なぜなら,こういう精巧で巧妙な破壊兵器を造っても,破壊や殺戮を行うに足るだけの人口が残されていなければ,いかにしてその機能を十分に発揮できようか,いやできないからである,といった議論を展開する。奇妙なことに,個々の親は,こうした議論が他人に適用される時には受け入れても,自分自身に適用された時には,まったく耳を傾けようとしない(例:軍事基地や原子力発電所が自分の住んでいる家の近くになければその必要性に賛成するが,近くにあるような場合は反対する/他人の子供が戦場に行くときには国を守るためには仕方ないと言うが,自分の子供の時は反対するか,何とか免れようとして画策したりする。)。聖職者や愛国主義者の心理は,まちがっている。聖職者たちは,'地獄の業火'でうまく脅かせるかぎり,成功するかもしれない。しかし,今日,このような脅かしを真に受けるのは,全人口のなかのごく少数にすぎない。しかも,これ(地獄の業火)に劣る脅しでは,非常に本質的に個人的な問題で行動をコントロールするためには,まったく不十分である。国家に関して言えば,その議論は,まったく残忍すぎる。人びとは,他人に対し'雑兵'を供給すべきだということには賛成するかもしれないが,我が子がこのように利用されるという見通しには魅力を感じない。それゆえ,国家としてできることは,貧乏な人たちを無知のままにしておくように努めることだけであり,そうした努力も,統計が示すように,西欧諸国の中の最も遅れた国々を除いては,奇妙にも不成功に終わっている。公共の義務の観念から予供を持とうとする男女は,ほとんどいないだろう。仮に,何らかのそのような公共の義務の存在が現在よりもずっと明らかであったとしても,ほとんどいないだろう。男女が子供を持つのは,子供が自分たちの幸福をいっそう増してくれるだろうと信じるからか,あるいは,避妊の方法を知らないためである。後者の理由は,いまだ非常に強力に働いているが,その力はしだいに弱まりつつある。また,国家あるいは教会が行うことができることで,この力が弱まりつづけるのを阻止するものは何もないだろう。それゆえ,もし白人種が生き残るべきとすれば,'親になること'が再び両親に幸福をもたらしうるようにする必要がある。 |
In view of all these troubles, is it any wonder that the birth-rate declines? The decline of the birth-rate in the population at large has reached a point which shows that the population will soon begin to dwindle, but among the well-to-do classes this point has long ago been passed, not only in one country, but in practically all the most highly civilised countries. There are not very many statistics available as to the birth-rate among the well-to-do, but two facts may be quoted from Jean Aylin's book alluded to above. It appears that in Stockholm in the years 1919 to 1922 the fertility of professional women was only one-third of that of the population at large, and that among the four thousand graduates of Wellesley College, U.S.A., in the period 1896 to 1913 the total number of children is about three thousand, whereas to prevent an actual dwindling of the stock there should have been eight thousand children none of whom had died young. There can be no doubt the civilisation produced by the white races has this singular characteristic, that in proportion as men and women absorb it, they become sterile. The most civilised are the most sterile; the least civlised are the most fertile; and between the two there is a continual gradation. At present the most intelligent sections of the Western nations are dying out. Within a very few years the Western nations as a whole will be diminishing in numbers except in so far as their stocks are replenished by immigration from less civilised regions. And as soon as the immigrants acquire the civilisation of the country of their adoption they in turn will become comparatively sterile. It is clear that a civilisation which has this characteristic is unstable; unless it can be induced to reproduce its numbers, it must sooner or later die out and give place to some other civilisation in which the urge towards parenthood has retained enough strength to prevent the population from declining. Official moralists in every Western country have endeavoured to treat this problem by means of exhortations and sentimentality. On the one hand, they say that it is the duty of every married couple to have as many children as God wills, regardless of any prospect that such children may have of health and happiness. On the Other hand, male divines prate about the sacred joys of motherhood and pretend that a large family of diseased and poverty-stricken infants is a source of happiness. The State joins in with the argument that an adequate crop of cannon fodder is necessary, for how can all these exquisite and ingenious weapons of destruction function adequately unless there are sufficient populations left for them to destroy? Strange to say, the individual parent, even if he accepts these arguments as applied to others, remains entirely deaf to them as applied to himself. The psychology of the divines and the patriots is at fault. The divines may succeed so long as they can successfully threaten hell-fire, but it is only a minority of the population that now takes this threat seriously. And no threat short of this is adequate to control behaviour in a matter so essentially private. As for the State, its argument is altogether too ferocious. People may agree that others ought to provide cannon fodder, but they are not attracted by the prospect of having their own children used in this way. All that the State can do, therefore, is to endeavour to keep the poor in ignorance, an effort which, as the statistics show, is singularly unsuccessful except in the most backward of Western countries. Very few men or women will have children from a sense of public duty, even if it were far clearer than it is that any such public duty exists. When men and women have children, they do so either because they believe that children will add to their happiness, or because they do not know how to prevent them. The latter reason still operates very powerfully, but it is steadily diminishing in potency. And nothing that either the State or the Churches can do will prevent this diminution from continuing. It is necessary, therefore, if the white races are to survive, that parenthood should again become capable of yielding happiness to parents. |
(掲載日:2006.06.12/更新日:2010.5.4)