Modern-day demographers view the nations of the world at different stages of what’s called the demographic transition. And what stage they’re in has a lot to do with their power on the world scene.
There are nations at an early stage of the transition, with high fertility rates (number of births per woman). There are nations at a middle stage of the transition, with fertility rates falling but population still growing. And there are nations at the end stage of the transition, where the fertility rate is less than needed to replace the current population.
A demographer named Paul Morland, in a book called THE HUMAN TIDE: How Population Shaped the Modern World, explained how population growth and decline is related to geopolitical power. There are nations with small populations that are rich, and there are nations with large populations have been poor and weak, but there are no nations that are both small and powerful.
The first nation to undergo the modern demographic transition was England, Morland’s own country. In the days of Queen Elizabeth and the Spanish Armada, England was small and poor, compared not only to France, which was Europe’s largest nation, but also to Spain.
The high English birth rate enabled the English to grow strong and to found new nations—the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. In 1870, the English fertility rate was six children per woman. British statesmen such as Cecil Rhodes foresaw a day when the English would overrun and rule the planet.
The high fertility rate of Anglo-Americans in the early 19th century explains their belief in their “manifest destiny” to create a nation that stretched from the Atlantic to the Pacific. Mexico was no match for the USA because its population growth had not yet taken off. Texas and California were virtually empty when Anglo settlers poured in.
The demographic transition began in the 20th century. The English fertility rate was down to three children per woman in 1914 and down to about two in the 1920s and beyond.
The English and French feared the higher German fertility rate. They may have been more willing to go to war in 1914 than they otherwise would have been, because they feared Germany would have had a greater population advantage in the future.
The Germans, in turn, feared the higher Russian fertility rate. They may have been more willing to go to war with Russia for the same reasons that the English and French were more willing to go to war with them.
Russia benefitted from its population surge. During the Second World War, the Red Army suffered many more casualties than the Wehrmacht, but won not only through its courage and fighting ability, but its greater numbers. If the opposing forces on the Eastern Front had been equal in numbers, Nazi Germany might have won the Second World War.
Now the fertility rate is below the replacement rate in all these countries—the USA (including all races and demographic groups, not just Anglos), the UK, Germany and the Russian Federation.
Americans, English, Germans and Russians are no longer spreading through the world. Instead Mexicans have been moving into the United States, citizens of the former British Empire are moving into the UK and the formerly subject peoples of Central Asia are immigrating into the Russian Federation.
Morland’s history covered many other nations and all the world’s regions. He did not of course claim that population is the only factor in world power, only that it is an important one. There is a correlation, although not a perfect one, between the rise and decline of economic and military power and the rise and decline of population.
Phil Ebersole's Blog 