Kurt Vonnegut's Argument Essay

1614 Words7 Pages
In “2BR02B” by Kurt Vonnegut,” Vonnegut maintains that we cannot put a cap on the population. The cap creates problems and deteriorates a much-needed stigma behind the idea of death. Death is and always has been the last experience a human has and it is their right to do so as they desire. Thus, this everlasting conflict in humanity supports that there can be no cap.
Paul Ehrlich was the front man for the idea that we would run out of resources and live in squalor, which would lead to situations like the one in “2BR02B”. In his book, Population Bomb, he argued “through his life that there is an impending doom containing overpopulation and starvation”(Ehrlich 18). Let the facts show that the world has taken the right path toward sustaining life and sending us towards prosperity. In R. Engelman article “Population and Sustainability: Can We Avoid Limiting the Number of People” Engelman’s key argument was that “slowing the rise in human numbers is essential for the planet--but it doesn't require population control”(Engelman 49). Placing a cap on the population will force consequences as
…show more content…
They would be killing humans in the name of saving humans. The thing about both stories is they give the message that we need to prevent it from happening. In the 2013 film “Snowpiercer”, revolutions are inflamed by the upper class to justify thinning the herd of the lower class. Once way of life becomes too drear, human life becomes worthless in the eyes of the people who want to survive the most. Normalizing death is considered an excuse exit and signifies that society’s run on earth is soon to end. The point of prosperity is to not let the world get so horrible that people would want to die in the first place for the “Soylent Green” scenario. So while these doomsday activists see this ghastly vision of the future, they fail to learn the real
Open Document