Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
John swifts modest proposal
John swifts modest proposal
John swifts modest proposal
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: John swifts modest proposal
Swift’s Modest Proposal for the Preventing the Children of Poor People from being a burden to their Parents or Country, and for Making Them Beneficial to the Public is a satire of the English opinion of the Irish, barbarians. Though this is a satire, Swift has a good point about eating children. In the world today there are approximately 6 billion people, many being children. By the year 2050, according to the World Population Profile: 1998, the population will reach 9.3 billion. Consumption of children would help this and many other problems that afflict our society as a whole.
“For first, as I have already observed, it would greatly lessen the number of papists, with whom we are yearly overrun, being the principal breeders of the nation as well as our most dangerous enemies; and who stay at home on purpose with a design to deliver the kingdom to the Pretender, hoping to take their advantage by the absence of so many good protestants, who have chosen rather to leave their country than stay at home and pay tithes against their conscience to an Episcopal curate.” (Swift, 3) He talks of lessening the number of people, which is good, considering at this time we have approximately six billion people, and the projected number for the year 2050 is 9.3 billion. While the rate of increase has declined over the years, adding the extra people to the earth is similar to repopulating Israel, Jordan, the West Bank, and Gaza to the existing population each year. Having 9.5 billion people habituating the earth, there will be a quarter as much fresh water per person in 2050 as there was in 1950. We lose over 100 species at 1000 times their natural rate. By consuming infants, we decrease the population in two ways, they will not grow to produce another generation and they will not live. In addition, this solves the problem of starvation, because many essential nutrients are stored in flesh, many cultures rely on a diet of only meat and stay healthy. Therefore, we wont lose to starvation, but we will have less people.
“Secondly, the poorer tenants will have something valuable of their own, which by law may be made liable to distress and help to pay their landlord's rent, their corn and cattle being already seized, and money a thing unknown.” (Swift, 4) The countries with the lowest population growth, have the most stable incomes, and thrive. Therefore, the consumption of hu...
... middle of paper ...
...as many benefits, mostly financial, but also some societal. With close to six billion people sharing one earth, this someday may be the case, because natural disasters, famine, war, and other factors, have not halted the increase. Consequently, the residence of the planet are at a point of decision, what to do about the population. China placed stringent laws upon its people to limit themselves to one child. However, protestors say this violates their human rights. Though Swift meant for this piece to mock the English, he opened a whole different “can of worms.”
Works Cited
Swift, Jonathan. A Modest Proposal. English Department, University of Pennsylvania. 6 February 2000 <http://www.english.upenn.edu/~jlynch/courses/95c/texts/modest.html>.
Battered Women. Templar Research Institute. 16 February 2000 <http://www.templar-research-inst.org/battered.html>.
Zero Population Growth. The Central Oregon Chapter of Zero Population Growth. 16 February 2000 <http://www.envirocenter.org/groups/zeropop/zeropop.html>.
World Population Continues to Grow. Enviromental News Network. 16 February 2000 <http://www.enn.com/enn-news-archieve/1999/04/040599/population_2496.asp>.
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?
This was mostly done by his descriptions of preparing the children like they are a chicken, and his list of advantages to eating children. While describing how to prepare a child Swift said, “a young healthy child well nursed is at a year old a most delicious, nourishing, and wholesome food.” The manner in which he described a human child the same way one would a cow, chicken, or fish. The obvious lack of ethics and morals in this passage cement 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.
One way that Swift tries to persuade the reader that his proposal is normal or ethical is through the fallacies of the scare tactic. Swift uses his proposal as an attack on the economic problems going on in Ireland. In the beginning swift begins to persuade the reader that his proposal is logical and normal. Do we agree on the fact that eating children is morally and economically wrong? He also states that his proposal would make the children “beneficial to the public” (444). Can we agree that Swift is not suggesting that the people of Ireland would really eat their children. More or
Swift explains how selling a marketable child will be profitable and why the people of Dublin are willing butcher children to survive. He does this by saying, “I rather recommend buying the children alive, and dressing them hot from the knife, as we do roasting pigs” (585). Swift uses verbal irony in a powerful way to state that Irish people should not be treated like animals killed as food. Swift points out the famine and the terrible living conditions that are threatening the Irish population by stating that children are a good source of food just like real animals do.... ... middle of paper ...
This essay will have no value unless the reader understands that Swift has written this essay as a satire, humor that shows the weakness or bad qualities of a person, government, or society (Satire). Even the title A Modest Proposal is satirical. Swift proposes using children simply as a source of meat, and outrageous thought, but calls his propo...
Jonathan Smith goes to extreme measures to explain his new plan to raise the economic wellbeing of his country. He explains what age is too young and what age is too old, in order to eat the tenants children when they are at their prime juiciness. He also gives a list of suggestions on how to cook them, ?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 equally serve in a fricassee, or a ragout.? All of this talk about eating children comes as a surprise because previous to this disturbing suggestion, Swift is ironically discussing the plight of starving beggars in Ireland. The reader is unprepared for the solution that he suggests.
Jonathan Swift, a well-known author, in his essay “A Modest Proposal,” implies that the Irish people should eat children so that they can better their chances of survival. Swift supports his implication by describing how his proposal will have many advantages such as, eliminating papists, bringing great custom to taverns, and inducing marriages. He comes up with an absurd proposal to eat and sell the children to the elite so the Irish can have a brighter future. His purpose is to show that the Irish deserve better treatment from the English. Throughout his essay, Swift uses sarcasm, satire, and irony.
The worldwide population is approaching 7 billion and is expected to reach 9 billion by 2050 (Baird). This projected population number is down from a once predicted 16 billion (Baird) and while some are not concerned, others are worried about any increase in population. Population growth is discussed in the articles “Too Many People?” by Vanessa Baird; “Population Control: How Can There Possibly Be Too Many of Us?” by Frank Furedi; and “The Population Bomb Revisited,” by Paul R. Ehrlich and Anne H. Ehrlich. Baird and Furedi concur that a concern for population growth has been around since mathematician Thomas Malthus, in 1798, warned that overpopulation could lead to “the collapse of society” (Furedi). Furedi claims that too much human life is being used as an excuse, by population control supporters, for the world’s current and future problems. Baird tries to discover if “the current panic over population growth is reasonable.” For Ehrlich and Ehrlich the concern over population growth is very real, and they reinforce and support their book “calling attention to the demographic element in the human predicament” (Ehrlich and Ehrlich 63). While taking different approaches to their articles, the authors offer their perspectives on population growth, population control and the environmental impacts of a growing population.
Summary: This article is about Sir David’s stance on population control. He claims that it is a “huge area of concern” and that the world will be disastrous if no one does anything to help control the issue. He discusses the severity, solutions, and sensitivities of population control. Sir David says that if no one attempts to solve the problem, the natural world will do so instead. He believes people should keep discussing the issue and put it on people’s agendas in order to solve it. There are three sensitivities surrounding the issue: the privilege to have children, religion, and world population being centered around Africa and Asia. This article provides the reader with Sir David’s view on population control, the areas of concern, and
“If we do not voluntarily bring population growth under control in the next one or two decades, the nature will do it for us in the most brutal way, whether we like it or not.” - Henry W. Kendall. This quote is just a small factor of what overpopulation around the world is doing. Each and every single day more and more people are born into this world, and the population increases rapidly every second. For example, the population right now in the United States is approximately 325 million people. The population in India today is about 1.25 billion people. The country with the largest population in the world right now is currently India, with 1.35 billion people, and China is not that far behind. With overpopulation in the world, there are less natural resources around the world, because all of the farmland is being taken up by new housing, buildings, and factories. Another problem it causes is air pollution. With all the factories being built, so many
An overarching issue that concerns all people due to its far-reaching implications is the subject of overpopulation. In the last two centuries, the global population has dramatically increased from 0.9 billion in 1800 to 7.6 billion in 2017. Some people may say growing population is beneficial since more people generates a bigger market and a bigger economy. On the other hand, the ramifications from dramatically increased population demonstrates the irrefutable negative facts on overpopulation. To understand the effects of overpopulation, it is imperative to explore its negative impacts on the environment, people’s lives, and the economy.
Tal’s views on overpopulation suggest that its chief effect is upon universal famine, land erosion, species exhaustion, and other social issues affecting the earth. According to Ellis, as mentioned above, the ecology of farming in China has suggested that technology has often surpassed carrying-capacity through history. However Tal debates this claim, however, in saying that: history has shown “long tetany of famines”, because carrying capacity is outdone by a rising populace. In fact, the Chinese food crisis, which lasted from 1958-1961 and caused low land fertility, triggered the death of over twenty million people. As a cause, the United Nations has reported that one in eight people on earth suffers from starvation, causing over 200 million deaths worldwide. Thus, if family planning was promoted years ago, this could have been avoided. Currently, global drifts are predicting that this will double by
Overpopulation of our planet has many negative connotations associated with it, defined as “the condition of having a population so dense as to cause environmental deterioration, an impaired quality of life, or a population crash” (Merriam Webster). In 1798, Thomas Malthus, an English Economist, published his theory of population, claiming that the number of inhabitants of Earth will soon outstrip the food supply, causing wars, pestilence, and famine, known as the Malthusian checks (Textbook). However, he failed to take into account the power of human intelligence, which has allowed the human race to flourish in the last 200 years and keep food production levels above population. In the late 20th century, Esther Boserup had published her own
Arresting global population growth should be second in importance only to avoiding the nuclear war on humanity 's agenda. Over population and rapid population growth are intimately connected with most aspects of the current human predicament, including rapid depletion of nonrenewable resources, deterioration of the environment and increasing international tensions. (Ehrlich) What we need to know is that unless we address the causes of overpopulation in a timely manner, we will see a point in which the earth cannot support the number of people