Classic rock musician on population growth (Ian Amderson, Jethro Tull)

Here's what Ian Anderson of Jethro Tull and solo work said about population growth in an interview in 2013:

Anderson comments

Excerpt reproduced under fair use for discussion:

Songfacts: Earlier you mentioned "Locomotive Breath" as one of the songs that you really connect with on stage and can get into character with. What is it about that song that you connect with?

Ian: When I wrote it, I wasn't deliberately setting out to write a piece of music on a particular subject. But it evolved during the writing process into being not terribly specific, but about the issues of overcrowding - the rather claustrophobic feel of a lot of people in a limited space. And the idea of the incessant unstoppable locomotive being metaphor for seemingly the unstoppable population expansion on planet Earth.

When I look at it today, it does, for me, become very crystallized in being a song about unmanageable population expansion. It's something that concerns me even more today than it did back when I wrote it, when the population of planet Earth was only about two thirds of what it is today. So in my lifetime alone, we've seen an enormous increase in population, and an enormous increase in the degree to which we devour our limited resources. So the idea of population planning and management is something that I think we ought to be thinking about a lot more than we do. Does that mean I think we should sterilize everybody after the age of 30? No, of course not. The size of the family you want to have is going to be your choice. But, you should make that choice knowingly, wisely, and responsibly.

I do hear this sometimes being said: "Oh, I want to have lots of babies. I want to have five, six, I want to have as many babies as I can, I love babies." Well, some people love collecting stamps or gold coins or cars. I don't think you should collect children just because you have some obsession about the scampering of tiny feet around your house. A responsible family should think in terms of having one or two children, and that's it.

We're not living in biblical times where we go forth and multiply. We have to think about how we're going to manage the very limited resources that we're encapturing, the most obvious one being water, which is becoming more and more an issue in many parts of the world, especially as we veer into the area of the effects of climate change. But asking people to think about population management, it's not something that politicians want to go near, because there are enough alarmed voices. As soon as you start talking about the need to curb the baby making process, it does smack of something that people find very repugnant, being told how many children they can have. And of course, it's got to come from inside, not from outside. People have got to be taking a responsible view.

I'm lucky, I have two children. A boy and a girl. My daughter has two children, a boy and a girl. We're very lucky. We don't need any more. Why would you possibly want more? It seems to me, you've been blessed with having children at all. If you have one of each sex, then I don't think you've got any excuses to say, Well, I think I'm going to have a few more. Yeah, well, fine. But we can't all take that view.

In most so-called civilized Western democracies, the natural child birthrate is below two for fertile women. And when educated people make a choice, it falls to somewhere around 1.8 in most countries of Europe. It's only pushed beyond two by, in our country, for example, because of non-indigenous folks who come here to take advantage of the welfare system and get child support. It's in their interest to have as many children as they can possibly squirt out, because they get paid per child. It's a free handout from the state. That is the reality. And it's one that, unfortunately, is driving our population, because we're a very popular destination for immigrants from other countries. That pushes our birthrates alarmingly high.

And these days in most places where people have choice, where women have the choice and have the freedom to make that choice, they choose to have less than two children per, I hate to use the word, but fertile women, that being the judgment. Well, you have to describe that infertile women don't have children. Men don't have children, women do. And so the general message is the replacement factor is described as how many children on average are born to a woman of child bearing age in a given country. Even in Italy, Roman Catholic country, supposedly we believe what the popes, past and present, tell us: no birth control. But in Italy, the replacement is less than two. It's actually lower than in the United Kingdom. So women in an educated Western society choose when given that choice to have fewer children. Which is encouraging. But it's very often the men of the household who attempt to drive these things and scatter their seed a little more widely.

So those are the issues touched upon in "Locomotive Breath." And it's indeed touched upon in some music that I've been writing in the last few weeks.

K-Man back. Saw in an interview several years ago that Ian threatened to castrate his son-in-law (or something else dire) if he fathered a third child with Ian's daughter. Limiting family size was Ian's issue, and he mentioned how crowded Britain was.

Then you have Sting, who fathered six children... At least one other classic rocker (Ian) showed some kind of reasoning.

If it makes you feel any better about Sting, I heard he makes his kids pave their own way, rather than handing them money & resources because special snowflake of wealthy duh. Not sure what extent he applies it to them, but I figured I should mention it. Its good to know Ian Anderson has some sense.

I don't know, I find it a little disingenuous for somebody to speak about this issue when they themselves have procreated. Maybe if his two kids were adopted I could totally get on board. Being conscious of it doesn't mean you're not part of the problem. Like vegans who pat themselves on the ass for having the bestest environmentally conscious diet, but then go on to breed because they apparently think their veganism outweighs anything else they do, never mind the fact that my omnivorous ass that is currently running two fans and two televisions (one acting as my computer monitor) will still have a lower carbon footprint for the mere nonaction of not having any fucking children.

But we can't purely blame immigrants for excessive reproducing. We have the religious assholes that want to breed "God's army" and outbreed the brown and black people or whatever bullshit, the ones on the lower rungs of the socioeconomic ladder that keep creating children they can't afford and their only financial plan is government-funded plans and charities (but then get very upset and bleat about "shaming" when it's suggested that they're irresponsible morons and that they don't actually have a right to create children for whom they can't afford to provide the requisite basics and then say they deserve to be given a big house because they had so many children and it's unfair if they don't get one), and of course, the special snowflake assholes that are infertile and will undergo wasteful fertility treatments to have their DNA replicant instead of being a fucking adult and accepting their lot by either going childless or adopting and end up with high order multiples (some of which end up with special needs because the human body did not evolve to carry a fucking litter).

------------------------------------------------------------
"Why children take so long to grow? They eat and drink like pig and give nothing back. Must find way to accelerate process..."
- Dr. Yi Suchong, Bioshock

"Society does not need more children; but it does need more loved children. Quite literally, we cannot afford unloved children - but we pay heavily for them every day. There should not be the slightest communal concern when a woman elects to destroy the life of her thousandth-of-an-ounce embryo. But all society should rise up in alarm when it hears that a baby that is not wanted is about to be born."
- Garrett Hardin

"I feel like there's a message involved here somehow, but then I couldn't stop laughing at all the plotholes, like the part when North Korea has food."
- Youtube commentor referring to a North Korean cartoon.

"Reality is a bitch when it slowly crawls out of your vagina and shits in your lap."
- Reddit comment

"Bitch wants a baby, so we're gonna fuck now. #bareback"
- Cambion

Oh whatever. Abortion doctors are crimestoppers."
- Miss Hannigan

Quote
paragon schnitzophonic
I don't know, I find it a little disingenuous for somebody to speak about this issue when they themselves have procreated. Maybe if his two kids were adopted I could totally get on board. Being conscious of it doesn't mean you're not part of the problem. Like vegans who pat themselves on the ass for having the bestest environmentally conscious diet, but then go on to breed because they apparently think their veganism outweighs anything else they do, never mind the fact that my omnivorous ass that is currently running two fans and two televisions (one acting as my computer monitor) will still have a lower carbon footprint for the mere nonaction of not having any fucking children.

I always make the statement that I could be the most jet setting, Corvette racing, steak eating, travel around the world, sharp dressing with everything dry cleaned playboy and not have the carbon score that I would if I were a duhd of even one child. Even Ian Anderson in the peak days of Jethro Tull and all the travel and concerts (and petroleum and electricity used for such) probably had a lower score before he had the kids. And I agree with his song, being around a crowd of people is like "locomotive breath."

I just started a job as a groundkeeper at a zoo, it has been quite an experience with breeders and kids but that will be another thread.

Quote
Paragon Schnitzophonic
I don't know, I find it a little disingenuous for somebody to speak about this issue when they themselves have procreated. Maybe if his two kids were adopted I could totally get on board. Being conscious of it doesn't mean you're not part of the problem. Like vegans who pat themselves on the ass for having the bestest environmentally conscious diet, but then go on to breed because they apparently think their veganism outweighs anything else they do, never mind the fact that my omnivorous ass that is currently running two fans and two televisions (one acting as my computer monitor) will still have a lower carbon footprint for the mere nonaction of not having any fucking children.

Yeah, I agree. The only reason why I didn't mention it, is because he at least acknowledges overpopulation is a problem, rather than being a typical stupid breeder, blinded by their rose colored glasses, thinking its no prob because most precious parasites are future assholes & scum leaders & innovators.

[quote="mr. neptune]
I always make the statement that I could be the most jet setting, Corvette racing, steak eating, travel around the world, sharp dressing with everything dry cleaned playboy and not have the carbon score that I would if I were a duhd of even one child.[/quote]

This. And you gotta love the breeders who just jump at your throat for not choosing some green trend. Like the woman with 3 brats who started judging me for using absorbants instead of menstrual cups. Yeah, if i could fit even the smallest size that would be great. But i guess she doesn't have this issue after 3 vaginal births. Or the one who almost ate me alive because i was eating a tuna sandwich and don't you know about overfishing and stuff? But she wants a big family.

Fine, you can choose being vegan or whatever but once you have kids, stop making such a great fuss over it.

Quote
blackpearl

This. And you gotta love the breeders who just jump at your throat for not choosing some green trend. Like the woman with 3 brats who started judging me for using absorbants instead of menstrual cups.

A person can try to live an environmentally-friendly lifestyle, but they can't declare themselves a full-fledged environmentalist if they have kids. That doesn't comport with reality.

Anyone who chastises a childfree person for their carbon footprint should have their heads examined. Better yet, you can stop them in their tracks by asking what your children's carbon footprint is, compared to theirs.

I'm a huge JT fan but I do think Ian Anderson sometimes comes across as rather arrogant in his interviews. Even having 2 children contributes to overpopulation. His kids have kids, and then those kids will probably have kids. It's not just the benefits people contributing to overpopulation. The only way to really do your part if you are concerned about the population is to not have any at all.

Ian does have an arrogant streak that comes across in numerous interviews, but in his defense he did have his two children back in the 1970s and they are around age 40 now. This was well before being childfree was really on the map, and the thought among those in the West who had concerns about overpopulation is that the "right" maximum number of kids was two as "replacement level". Many such people were actually appalled at the strict one-child policy China implemented in 1979.

By our standards here at Bratfree that logic of two kids for every couple is ridiculous, but thinking of stopping at two then was a big step for many people, especially since in some Third World countries in the 1970s the average number of births per woman was still 6 or more. In some Muslim countries it was as high as 8 per woman. The idea of choosing not to have children at all was simply not on very many people's radar then. Even Paul Ehrlich, who wrote the dire book The Population Bomb, did have one child instead of none.

I singled out Sting (Gordon Sumner) for a reason. His age is nearly the same as Ian Anderson's (65 v. 69 as I write this). But Sting kept fathering children with different women until the mid–1990s, ending with child No. 6, yet some years ago he had the gall to try to lecture the Third World about overpopulation. And Ian is arrogant?

Kman,

Speaking solely for myself, I'm neutral on those who have kids. If people want kids, fine. If not, that's fine too.

I don't consider myself an ecology nut but I do recycle and try to do what I can.

My beef is with the holier-than-thou "environmentalist" parents. They are the ones who are all too eager to give the rest of us a lecture about their new Prius versus our 4x4, meanwhile they've got a yard full of plastic crap and four garbage cans worth of shit on the curb every trash day.

Amen, S54! I'm a vegan without kids, so anytime I get a lecture from the garbage police for accidentally putting something recyclable into the trash (it has happened several times), it's a little too precious. I could never turn my lights off, leave water running for the rest of my life and eat off nothing but styrofoam that I throw out the window of a Hummer and never get near the average "eco-parent's" environmental destruction.

Sting is a hideous person. Lecturing about over-population? Really?

Quote
kman
Ian does have an arrogant streak that comes across in numerous interviews, but in his defense he did have his two children back in the 1970s and they are around age 40 now. This was well before being childfree was really on the map, and the thought among those in the West who had concerns about overpopulation is that the "right" maximum number of kids was two as "replacement level". Many such people were actually appalled at the strict one-child policy China implemented in 1979.

By our standards here at Bratfree that logic of two kids for every couple is ridiculous, but thinking of stopping at two then was a big step for many people, especially since in some Third World countries in the 1970s the average number of births per woman was still 6 or more. In some Muslim countries it was as high as 8 per woman. The idea of choosing not to have children at all was simply not on very many people's radar then. Even Paul Ehrlich, who wrote the dire book The Population Bomb, did have one child instead of none.

I singled out Sting (Gordon Sumner) for a reason. His age is nearly the same as Ian Anderson's (65 v. 69 as I write this). But Sting kept fathering children with different women until the mid–1990s, ending with child No. 6, yet some years ago he had the gall to try to lecture the Third World about overpopulation. And Ian is arrogant?

I thought about that after posting, that I was thinking from a modern and CF perspective and thought about the era he wrote Locomotive Breath and the ages of his kids. It was progressive thinking for the time to limit the amount of children to have. And you're right, at least he's not a geezer breeder like Sting or Mick Jagger. I do love Ian Anderson, I think he's great. I pretty much listen to JT on the regular, last time I got to see them in concert was some time in the early 90s, hope I get another chance. The way 2016 was to other musicians of his era kind of has me worried about him, ha!

Quote
happyhiker
Amen, S54! I'm a vegan without kids, so anytime I get a lecture from the garbage police for accidentally putting something recyclable into the trash (it has happened several times), it's a little too precious. I could never turn my lights off, leave water running for the rest of my life and eat off nothing but styrofoam that I throw out the window of a Hummer and never get near the average "eco-parent's" environmental destruction.

Sting is a hideous person. Lecturing about over-population? Really?

I would tell the garbage police to sod off. In some places, it doesn't make a difference. My county claims to recycle on their website, but they don't. My dad used to be a mechanic for the garbage trucks, and mentioned that at the facility garbage and recycling were dumped into one pile, presumably headed for the landfill.

Lock him up or put him down.
Stolen from Shiny.