Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Poverty in developing countries
Poverty in developing countries
Discuss jonathan swift as an essayist
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Helping Those less Fortunate
Hunger and poverty will always exist. Needy nations are stuck in a black hole, in which, there is no light at the end of the tunnel. This situation could be fixed, if the poor nations had assistance from those who could spare a few goods. Is it morally good for the better off nations to help or support those who are in need? Who benefits from this sponsorship in the long run? Poverty-stricken nations could seek relief, if the silk-stocking nations aid in supplying goods. Many of the moneyed nations are torn between helping or not, those who are less fortunate. Jonathan Swift and Garrett Hardin have two very different opinions on whether to aid those who were not born into riches. Swift uses a satire for the
…show more content…
There will always be a man walking down the road in search of his next meal. Hunger around the world is real and will continue to be. What if, cannibalism was not frowned upon if it was last resort? Swift presented that cannibalism would end the hunger. A Husband and wife would have a child, raise the babe until he is nice and plump, then sell him for this “child will make two dishes at an entertainment for friends...” (Swift 382). In the proposal, there are a few suggestions on how to cook the tender meat. He was implying that the people need to buy each other’s goods and material. Buy groceries at the local market, where the transaction will help the neighbor. Do not buy overseas, for that does nothing to help the community. Harding, opposing that the rich should help the beggar. It is not his fault that a beggar was born in the life he was dealt. The world food bank is a nasty plan in his mind. The people with extra change, supply the food bank, while the poor take and take. He mentioned it was more of a transaction instead of a bank. The rich put in food, while the poor take and never replenish. He stated, “If each country is solely responsible for its own well-being, poorly managed ones will suffer. But they can learn from experience” (Hardin, 174). Meaning, each county should tend to their own, and learn from their lack of unpreparedness to take care of their people during an
The point where you see that Swift’s proposal is meant to be satiric is when he starts to talk about the economic gains of selling poor children. It is meant to be a point to address the exceeding amount of poor children that are being sold to slavery rather than an indication to cannibalism. A modern audience
The issue that Swift is addressing is the fact that there are too many poor children in Dublin and that they are becoming such a huge burden for all the poor mothers or parents of the country. Swift then creates his own solution to the problem. He proposes that all poor children who are around one year of age, be cooked and eaten by the people of Dublin, preferably the poor. With this solution, he argues that it will eventually put an end to the overpopulation of the poor young children and it will satisfy the hunger for all the other people. Crazy right?
The obvious lack of ethics and morals in this passage cements that this essay is satirical and should not be understood as a legitimate solution to the starvation issue. He later listed the advantages of a system that breeds children for food, these advantages are all very unethical simply based off the fact that they are benefits of eating infants. Swift mentioned ideas including the murder of Catholic babies, eating humans as a fun custom, and giving the poor something of value (their own children). His use of ethos shows the audience that the essay is satirical and emphasizes the extreme ridiculousness of his ideas. Swift’s use of these three devices created a captivating and somewhat humorous satire.
One issue that we discussed in “Lifeboat Ethics” and in “A Modest Proposal” is whether or not the rich should help the poor and if the poor can contribute anything to society. Garrett Hardin and Jonathan Swift have different views on whether or not people should help the impecunious. Hardin, who has only been rich and never been poor, believes the starving don’t deserve help because it’s their fault that they are poor and that they are a waste rather than view them as assets. Swift, who has been rich and poor, believes that the poor can be salvageable and that the poor have a better chance at improving themselves.
“In twentieth-century America the history of poverty begins with most working people living on the edge of destitution, periodically short of food, fuel, clothing, and shelter” (Poverty in 20th Century America). Poverty possesses the ability to completely degrade a person, as well as a family, but it can also make that person and family stronger. In The Jungle, by Upton Sinclair, a family of immigrants has to live in severe poverty in Packingtown, a suburb of Chicago. The poverty degrades the family numerous times, and even brings them close to death. Originally the family has each other to fall back on, but eventually members of the family must face numerous struggles on their own, including “hoboing it” and becoming a prostitute. The Jungle, a naturalistic novel by Upton Sinclair, reveals the detrimental effects that a life of poverty exerts on the familial relationships of immigrants in Chicago during the early 1900’s.
Jonathan Swift’s proposal would not make sense ethically to its audience unless the reader had no value for humans. In this case Swift’s proposal would make sense and would be an acceptable proposal to resolve the problems of the poor in Ireland. The following statement, “I have been assured by a very knowing American of my acquaintance in London, that a young healthy child well nursed is at a year old a most delicious, nourishing, and wholesome food, whether stewed, roasted, baked, or boiled; and I make no doubt that it will
It is a great contradiction and absurdity that a husband and father proposes the idea of cannibalism. The narrator does not want the reader to agree that the solution to overpopulation and poverty in Ireland is to eat babies; he wants the reader to see it. needs to be a practical solution. Although something seems one way to the narrator, Jonathan Swift wants. the reader to see it in the opposite light.
Political issues or matters concerning the well-being of mankind is not something new to us. Social and political hierarchies have existed for millennia, yet the ways in which people have voiced their concerns or opinions on sensitive topics related to these hierarchies have evolved over time. One way in which people have addressed important society matters has been through satire. Typically satirical writings are fueled by anger brought about by a political event or societal issue. Instead of voicing their anger directly to the people, Jonathan Swift and other satirical authors, have used satire as “the engine of anger, rather than the direct expression of anger” (Egendorf 40). In doing so,
Throughout Swift’s proposal, the proposer is created to both identify and ridicule the reader through his persona and tone. The reader becomes identified with the civilized, educated proposer only to be forced to reflect themselves as cannibals. Although the proposal is often viewed as inhumane, it reinforces Enlightenment ideals, including utilitarianism which concludes it maximizes happiness while producing the least amount of suffering. The irony throughout the proposal is, then, not that the landlords are cannibals but that the proposal is actually humane and rational, yet still unaccepted.
Even though fasting is a controversial topic that has the whole world at odds with one another, Hunger: An Unnatural History by Sharman Apt Russell is informative and inspiring in that of the significance it has on the human race as well as the professional book reviews that help give insight into the problem of hunger. Everyday people in third world countries starve to death based on the fact that their countries simply don’t have enough resources or that their leaders only take office for their own personal gain instead of trying to actually help their country. So people rebel everyday by going on hunger strikes to fulfill a life’s goal whether it be to take a stand against the leader of their country like Mahatma Gandhi or to help raise awareness to a situation, both of which do not involve war. Hunger strikes are an effective way of not having to use violence.
In this paper, I will argue against two articles which were written against Singer’s view, and against helping the poor countries in general. I will argue against John Arthur’s article Famine Relief and the Ideal Moral Code (1974 ) ,and Garrett Hardin’s article Lifeboat Ethics: the Case Against Helping the Poor ( 1976); I will show that both articles are exaggerating the negative consequences of aiding the poor, as well as building them on false assumptions. Both Arthur and Hardin are promoting the self-interest without considering the rights of others, and without considering that giving for famine relief means giving life to many children.
Mouth-watering, scrumptious, and delicious are a few words that come to mind when you think of Jonathan Swift’s “A Modest Proposal.” His satire on the conditions of life in 1729 was to draw its readers to serious discussion on the distressing matters that plagued their society. His extreme and sarcastic response to the treatment of the ever-growing poor population of Irish families, by the rich English landowners, was to bring to light a matter that they had come to accept as normal. Apparently, over time English landowners obtained ownership of Irish lands and would lease these lands back to the Irish farmers at outrageous prices. This made it nearly impossible for farming families to make ends meet and in some cases to the point of near starvation. When many children of poor families grew up, they fled to foreign lands in search of a better life or they turned to a life of crime to make a living. The staggering number of children born to parents that could not support them was shocking and of a surety rarely considered in wealthy homes. Through this essay, he compelled the current government officials of the time to devise rational solutions that would deal with the large population of poor Irish farmers, and fix the conditions in which they lived.
In the fourth book of Gulliver’s Travels, Jonathan Swift uses satire to draw reader’s attention towards his concerns about humanity and uses irony to reveal his cynical views towards human kind. According to the Great Chain of Being, a term developed by the Renaissance that describes a divinely hierarchical order in every existing thing in the universe, human beings are placed a tier higher than animals (http://academic.brooklyn.cuny.edu/english /melani/cs6/ren.html). However, by comparing human traits with unpleasant qualities of animals, Swift blurs the definition of human being and questions the hierarchical place of human. In the fourth book of Gulliver’s Travels, Gulliver starts his journey as a well-educated European person who is considered to be a decent example of humanity. The first group of inhabitants Gulliver finds on the island where he is dropped off on are the Yahoos. Gulliver is disgusted by the behaviours of these wild creatures at first and he considers them to be animals that are owned by the dominate beings on this island. Gulliver then discovers the Houyhnhnms whom he perceives as brute beasts (Swift 2420) and animals (ibid.) because they share similar physical qualities compare to the horses in England. After a brief interaction with the two Houyhnhnms, Gulliver is taken to the house of a Houyhnhnm whom he will later refer to as his master. Through the interactions with the Houyhnhnms, Gulliver is able to show the ability to reason even though he shares some physical similarities with the Yahoos. Due to this quality and the fact that the Houyhnhnms cannot see his bare skin under his clothes, he is able to live with the Houyhnhnms. Gulliver starts to relate himself more to the Houyhnhnms than the Yahoos becau...
Traveling around the world can open your eyes to many new discoveries. Jonathan Swift was a well-known author during the 1600 and 1700’s. Many of Swift’s pieces were based on his experiences during his travels. “For most general readers, the name Jonathan Swift is associated only with his satiric masterpiece Gulliver's Travels. They are not aware that, in addition to it and hundreds of poems, he wrote a great deal of nonfictional prose, much of it of considerable interest, significance, and excellence” (Schakel).
Danielle Knight stated that “The true source of world hunger is not scarcity but policy; not inevitability but politics, the real culprits are economies that fail to offer everyone opportunities, and societies that place economic efficiency over compassion.” The author is trying to say that, basically, world hunger is mainly caused by us humans. The world is providing more than enough food for each and every one of us on earth according to the report - 'World Hunger: Twelve Myths'. The problem is that there are so many people living in the third world countries who do not have the money to pay for readily available food. Even if their country has excess food, they still go hungry because of poverty. Since people are mistaken by “scarcity is the real cause of this problem”, governments and institutions are starting to solve food shortage problems by increasing food production, while there really is an excess of food in some countries. Although the green revolution was a big success globally, hunger still exists in some countries. The author stated, “Large farms, free-markets, free trade, and more aid from industrialized countries, have all been falsely touted as the ‘cure’ to end hunger”. All of those are used to promote exports and food production, it doesn’t increase the poor’s ability to buy food he says. What the government really should do is to balance out the economy, and let more people earn more money to buy more foods.