chance for survival, more chance'of being supported.in old ag'e, more hands to work and bring home income, more loved ones around. It's only when we get to the over-rich, with high material. . expenditures frir,college educations, freeways, suburban homes, television sets, etc., that the benefits of people are outweighed by their "costs." ' Is it possible that our views on population have not only been short-sighted and self-interested but have robbed us of many benefits of a more loving attitude toward other people? Have we demeaned our feelings and actions toward others by considering them "surplus population" and feeling threatened by their existence, rather than knowing them as real individuals to be loved and cherished? How much do we alter our attitudes towards our bodies and relationships ~ith others when the r~sponsibi'lity and nature of sex is reduced to merely pleasure? Or does that give us a better un- ,derstanding of the interplay of sex and love? Have we lost sight of ~ ,. ' /~eproductive freedom" is very !1 . t n ~;fferent from "populatio~ control." ~4 the incredible positive energy of birth and of children, and their ability to draw people together across almost all barriers of society? Have we not seen in our own lives how much hunger there is in people for that special energy which children give, and how much that gift.is valued? Are children and grandchildren a more rewarding "family ef\tertainment cener" than a TV? Have we even, for the moment, lost sight of death and the hard but important lessons it holds for us-of lessening our outsized sense of our own importance and power', of bringing us to truly cherish -and live our lives fully, and to understand better the interplay of the varied strands of nature.that interweave with our lives? It is difficult to sort through these co~plicated personal and social issues. It is important not to belittle the positive personal freedom and empowerment of our increasing ability to choose when and if to have children-p~~f.icularly for, women. Certainly it is the • individual's respqnsibility towards life-qne's own and others'- that is important, not directives handed down by the powerful-be they church or st.ate. "Reproductive freedom" is very different from "populatio~ ~ontrol," We are better judges of our personal January 1980 More people means less for everyo~e, or so the story goes. But less of what? and community resources a_nd what they will support in both numbers and living style than is some distant "authority." Traditions ~1m~t be living things and must always be relearned and made real in,each of our lives. Such things as Papal proclamations'may only be the hollow echo of dead and forgotten beliefs, but we need to listen::carefully to them and to other voices that don't mesh easily with oµr current understandings. They can give us~ needed sense of values and beliefs that span more than our own micro-conditions-:-fouchstones that get us to dig deeper and question more fully the basis of ou,r own attitudes. It's quite possible that in the n,ext twenty years fertility an~ children will become again a valued survival mechanism, and tha,t their value and role in the whole web of human society will be rediscov,- ered. Looking ahead at that now, we can see the strangeness in our present condition and the value of changing it. We can see ho"": our cuhui-al heritage of "wide-open spaces" blinds u~ to the value,of close community and of self-development in close interaction witn others. • . " We can discover that moral resources are at least the equal of material ones, and that privacy can be found within ourselves as well as in separation from other people. Centeredness can be found in meditation as well as in huge tracts of preserved wilderness. The crowded cultures of Asia have always known this. We can lea:rµ that Tender Loving Care can produce more food than can fertilizers, and on tiny plots of land. More people may mean more Beethovens, more Beatles, more Buddhas and more greatness as well as rriore elbows to bump into. And we may discover that the secrets of the universe can be found in the peaceful oasis of a tiny ,Zen garden more easily than in our busy cities of today. It is possible that people, rather than being a proble~, may b~ . one of the most precious and wonderful inventions in our universe: • t - J f ' would cost 75 percent less to save this amount of energy through-installation of conservation and solar equipment than to produce it at this nuclear site. School research team uses the kind of con:.. servative, hardhJaded analysis-favored by government and business policymakers, and reaches the conclusion that no nearsolar from competing on an equal footing with other energy sources. To remove these distortions, they favor a combination of government sanctions and incenti~es,_' with a greater emphasis on the carrot,than on the stick. Surpdsingly, they believe their calculation that the true cost oflmported oil may be.triple wh~t ~e pay 1for, it "suggests an incentive payment or,otheF form of offsetting.subsidy of two-thirds of the cost df implementing conpervation and solar energy," but they stop short of recommending so drastic a polic:y, and believe smaller incentives to be sufficient. • Every million :dollars spent' on the energy conservation/solar energy strategy would generate 1.4 times as,much employment as each million dollars spent on the nuclear facility. • Energy Future: Report'of the Energy Project at the Harvard Business School, edited by Robert Stobcl,ugh and Daniel Yergin, $12.95 from: Random House New York, NY 10022 Advocacy of solar/c:~n,s_;rvation strategies to solve America's energy dilemma lost any remaining tinge of heresy in establishment circles with the publication last year of this landmark study. The Harvard Business •term prospect exists for a substantial increase_in production 9f domestic oil, gas, coal or nuclear power. They see only two real choices for the U.S. in the '80s and '90s: the hazardous one of continuing to import huge quantities of oil or the sensible one of accelerating development of conservation and small-scale solar. Energy Future editors Stobaugh and Yergin, anticipating charges by defenders of conventional energy sources that their conclusions somehow link them to the philosophy of "romanticists who have a vision . . . of'a. post-industrial society," stress their belief in economic growth and a free market. However, free market advocacy , does not blind them to the presence of severe distortions in the existing energy marketplace which prevent conservation and Energy Future is as notable for the'quality of its presentation as for its conclusion,s,. The Harvard tea:q1 has met the challenge of preparing a good short study of an iin- • , mense and complex topic, and their analyses of the future prospects of oil, coal, gas and nuclear are as worth reading as th~it"• comments on solar and conservation. Definitely take a look at this book. -JF
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy NTc4NTAz