Meeting for Sufferings: Quaker Concern Over Population (QCOP)
'One Friend asked if the minute could request anyone concerned with QCOP to send ‘proper detail’ of their complaints.'
After some routine business accepted on draft minute, the room turned to its first main item of the day: whether or not to renew Quaker Concern Over Population (QCOP) as a Quaker Recognised Body (QRB). Discernment on this had been postponed from the last Meeting. Also for discernment was the question: Is it time to review the QRB system, including guidance and its underpinning processes? Some concerns about QCOP had been raised, explained Robert Card, [principally that worrying about population growth in the global south was connected to racist tropes]. But ‘the issue for us is whether we are prepared to recognise it as a QRB, not to come to a decision of what the Quaker position on overpopulation is.’
One Friend read a short note from Martin Schweiger, convener of QCOP, explaining how the organisation arose from Quakers’ 2011 Canterbury Commitment on sustainability, when some Friends felt population was not being considered. It is a ‘complicated issue with many different aspects’, said the note. ‘Some Young Friends have formed the opinion that QCOP is a racist organisation.’ QCOP does not consider this to be true, and has repeatedly asked for material to substantiate the criticism, with ‘nothing forthcoming’. Offers from the QCOP committee to listen to Young Friends had also met with no response, the note said.
Martin Schweiger stressed that the global population is rising, and that some parts of the world had exceeded their capacity to care for their existing population. QCOP wishes Quakers to consider these issues and discuss solutions, he said.
Hannah Stranex, Young Friends General Meeting (YFGM) co-clerk, said that YFGM had had meetings with QCOP over the past couple of months. The discussions were ‘interesting and challenging’, she said. While QCOP’s ideas might not be racist in themselves, they could come from a background of racism, and Young Friends were concerned that QCOP might fall down a ‘slippery slope’. ‘But we valued their discussions greatly,’ she added.
One Friend noted ‘an array of views in QCOP’ and ‘valuable discussion’. But it was ‘really important’ that, in talking about global south countries ‘exceeding capacity’, and leading to migration, ‘we do not suggest that people in some parts of the world are responsible for the environmental crisis’.
A QCOP member emphasised that the group is very aware that the climate crisis is caused by rich countries. An increasing number of movements in the global south are ‘very concerned about the rate of population’, she added, and addressing women’s health and making family planning more available has had ‘a profound effect’. To say that discussions on population have been tainted by racism and eugenics in the past is not a strong enough reason to de-register QCOP, she added.
After a twenty-minute shuffle break, Friends regathered with Robert Card noting ‘a lot of eager Friends standing already’. After reminding them that ‘the question is whether we are prepared to re-register QCOP’, he asked if there were Friends who felt they would have to stand against that. One Quaker said that, while she ‘absolutely endorsed the work of the QCOP committee’ and was aware there was ‘no intended racism… the name, when I first read it, shocked me… [there is] such a thing as accidental sexism, accidental racism’. Another Quaker felt the name had ‘echoes of eugenics’, while another said that QCOP needed to explicitly consider how it would respond to ‘racism and racist tropes in events or meetings – that work needs to be done’.
More ministry followed in which Friends wrestled with the issue. One QCOP member said the group had made ‘strenuous efforts to distance ourselves from population control… When we talk to women in the global south, they welcome [the discussions]. Many are forced to have children they’re not ready for… a claim of racism really demands a serious argument which we feel we have not heard,’ he said. ‘And appeals to engage have fallen on deaf ears.’
There was no reason not to re-register QCOP, suggested another Friend, but it should be noted that deepening reflection in recent years has meant ‘we understand that racism can be perceived even when it is unintended’. This led to speculation on whether changing the name to Quaker Concern for Women’s Health and Reproductive Rights might settle some unease.
Robert Card asked the room if they could register the group ‘mentioning some of our reservations in the minute’. After more discernment, the MfS clerk suggested re-registering QCOP for two, not five years, and asking the group to work on the issues raised.
One Friend asked if the minute could request anyone concerned with QCOP to send ‘proper detail’ of their complaints. Are we getting tied up with semantics?, asked another. ‘I felt nothing but integrity from the group… Are we listening with the ears of judgement, rather than curiosity?’
Eventually, after more amendments, the minute was passed.
Comments
Please login to add a comment
