I don't know that I have ever heard a more reprehensible set of opening paragraphs.
By finally backing away from its one-child policy, China would seem to be opening the gates again to demographic expansion. But it may prove an opening that few Chinese embrace, for a host of reasons.
Initially, the one-child policy made great sense. The expansion of China’s power under Mao Zedong was predicated in part on an ever-growing population. Between 1950 and 1990, the country’s Maoist era, the population, roughly doubled to 1.2 billion, according to U.N. figures. Deng Xiaoping’s move to limit population growth turned out to be a wise policy, at least initially, allowing China to focus more on industrialization and less on feeding an ever-growing number of mouths.
Hmmm... Yeah. Can you imagine someone writing like this, instead?
Initially, the native-relocation policy made great sense. The expansion of US power during the post-colonial period was predicated in part on an ever-growing agricultural and industrial base. Between 1783 and 1830, the states' population had grown rapidly, and the acculturation of Native Americans was slow. The Indian Removal Act was wise legislation, allowing the US to focus on the development of agriculture and industrialization without clashing with natives or having difficulty allocating land among US citizens.
No mention of the Trail of Tears, forcibly removing people from their homes, 10-40% death rates on the road?
And in the article about China, no mention of the terror: the forced abortion, infanticide, compulsory sterilization, jailing and beatings of those who tried to hide their relatives' pregnancies, jailing of activists, or soaring suicide rates. No mention of the fact that the two-child policy still has the full force of the same government behind it on the same issue.
No, instead, we get, "this policy clearly has outlived its usefulness" and a bit of demographic calculus.
It will be said that Mr. Kotkin focuses on demographic trends. This is like saying that people who focus on medicine should focus on the wisdom of using various torture methods, without any reference to the fact that it's, you know, torture.
If you want to get a solid look at "technocracy", this is your chance.