Compare and Contrast the Demographic Perspectives of Thomas Malthus and Karl Marx with respect to the causes and consequences of population growth Essay

As we venture further into the 21st century, the global people seems to be growing at an alarming rate. By 2030 the world is to inhabitancy of estimation 8.3 billion, as compared to 6.12 billion just 30 years prior. (UN 2008) This ingeminate speaks to the increasing world growth that the world is facing right now. A demographic perspective is an understanding of how the progress tos of tribe are related to the consequences. doubting Thomas Malthus and Karl Marx are population theorists who are concerned with the control of the population, modernization and economical growth, to name a few. Firstly, Poverty was unitary of the leading problems that both(prenominal) sociologists aphorism would come out of the population growth. However they both ascertain it to 2 different causes. Population growth is generated by tender worlds who like former(a) species are driven by a special urge to reproduce.(Malthus) Malthus posited that it was repayable to persons in poverty with al l their free time and their timeless offense that poverty is on the rise. He believes that persons in poverty because they pack null to do during the day just engage in sexual natural action and reproduce causing population growth at an exponential level. On the other hand Marx attacked the writing of Thomas Malthus retorting that free time to have sex wasnt the cause but in fact the cause was an exploitation of the attainers by the owners of the means of production. He attested that the specific traffic of exploitation which obtained at that time between wage workers and capitalists, and the antagonistic transaction between the landed and the industrial interests, changing them into the operation of the natural legal philosophy of necessity that manifests itself through positive checks to population growth. Furthermore Marx and Malthus differ in intellections on if society continues to increase can they survive i.e. feed themselves.Malthus in his essay on the Principle of Population (1798), Malthus presented a startling idea. He theorized that the population grew exponentially (i.e. 2,4,6,8 etc), whilst food supply grew arithmetically (i.e. 1, 2, 3 etc). This idea, dubbed the Malthusian Equation, was seen as proof that the world population would inevitably exceed food supply. The resolve, he believed, would be benignant anarchy. The population would thus be dramatically reduced, as many the majority being scurvy would proceed from starvation. This can be supported with the study in Calcutta India which has witnessed unbridled population growth. In the streets of the city, which are notorious for being the dirtiest and most densely populate in the world, thousands starve to death. (Musapha, 2006). However Marx did not feel the same direction as he disputes Malthus statement about society not being able to last.Marx postulates that the food supply is not threatened by over-population. He claims that with the use of technology it is possible to pr oduce food and other goods indispensable to meet the demand of a growing population. Therefore the growing population would survive as technological advancements would make it possible. Nevertheless the issue of over-population is a key issue to be discussed. These two sociologists see differing arguments when it comes to over-population. Malthus believes that over-population would lead to famine, pesterer and war which would act as a natural limit to human population increase. In order to combat the imminent demise of the human race, Malthus suggested preventative and positive checks. He was particularly critical of the myopic, who he saw as thorns in the side of society.He was a strong advocate of the abolition of the Poor Law, a welfare system which he believed encouraged the poor to reproduce themselves. He saw no causal agent to pay the poor as they wouldnt be able to change their position and would continue to be a parasite on society. sooner he advocated that the money be given to the upper classes, so they could tally to high society art, science etc. He believed strongly that it was the poor who were to be eradicated and the rich to take the dominion of the world and carry on the rich legacy. In Herberts Spencer this was survival of the fittest. On the contrary Marxs most robust criticism of Malthus theory is the latters opinion that the poor are culpable for the global demise. He believes that it is not the poor that is to be blamed for the population surge, but the rich.He believes that in an endeavour to accumulate and expand capital growth, the rich rely heavily on the poor to reproduce themselves. This is because when there is a large labour big businessman but a scarcity of jobs the worker, in his desperation for employment, will work for anything. Thus the capitalists are able to keep wages very outset and a reserve army of labour is endangered, who will work at anytime for anything. The bourgeoisie brainwash the proletariat into thin king that large families will result in greater chances of employment, and as a result, population sees a attach expansion.Therefore, in Marxs eyes, Malthus theory in the capitalists elbow grease to rectify social phenomena and blame the poor for something that is not their fault. In closing, both the Malthusian and Marxist theories on demographics have their similarities and differences. There are tenets of their ideas approach shot through in all aspects of modern society. However, to apply only one to the current situation is a flawed approach, as there must be a combination of the best elements of the two.