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 twenty-first century, the global universe of discourse check up onms to be growing at an alarming rate. By 2030 the human being is to home of estimation 8.3 billion, as comp atomic number 18d to 6.12 billion just 30 years prior. (UN 2008) This quote speaks to the increasing people growth that the world is cladding right now. A demographic perspective is an understanding of how the causes of universe are related to the consequences. Thomas Malthus and Karl Marx are population theorists who are concerned with the hold of the population, modernization and economic growth, to name a few. Firstly, Poverty was one of the principal problems that twain sociologists aphorism would come out of the population growth. However they both ascertain it to two different causes. Population growth is generated by kind-hearted bes who like other species are driven by a especial(a) urge to reproduce.(Malthus) Malthus posited that it was due to persons in meagern ess with all their bounteous prison term and their timeless passion that poverty is on the rise. He believes that persons in poverty because they have nothing to do during the day just engage in sexual activity 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 workers by the owners of the means of production. He attested that the specific relations of exploitation which obtained at that time between remuneration workers and capitalistics, and the antagonistic relations between the landed and the industrial interests, changing them into the carrying into action of the inhering law of necessity that manifests itself through positive checks to population growth. furthermore Marx and Malthus differ in opinions on if caller continues to increase can they hold out i.e. feed themselves.Malthus in his essa y 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 intellectual nourishment 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 outstrip food supply. The result, he believed, would be human anarchy. The population would thus be dramatically reduced, as many the majority being poor would die 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 roughly densely populated in the world, thousands starve to death. (Musapha, 2006). However Marx did not rule the same way as he disputes Malthus statement about society not being able to last.Marx postulates that the food supply is not exist by over-population. He claims that with the use of technol ogy it is possible to produce food and other goods needed to meet the demand of a growing population. accordingly the growing population would survive as technological advancements would make it possible. as yet 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, pestilence and war which would act as a natural limit to human population increase. In order to combat the threatening demise of the human race, Malthus suggested preventative and positive checks. He was particularly life-sustaining of the poor, who he saw as thorns in the side of society.He was a strong advocator of the abolition of the Poor Law, a welfare system which he believed encouraged the poor to reproduce themselves. He saw no reason to pay the poor as they wouldnt be able to ameliorate their position and would continue to be a sponger on society. Instead he adv ocated that the money be given to the pep pill classes, so they could contribute 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 latter(prenominal)s 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 effort to accumulate and expand capital growth, the rich avow heavily on the poor to reproduce themselves. This is because when there is a big labour force but a scarcity of jobs the worker, in his despondency for employment, allow work for anything. Thus the capitalists are able to keep yield very low and a reserve army of labour is endangered, who will work at anytime for anything. The bourgeoisie brainwas h the proletariat into thinking that spacious families will result in greater chances of employment, and as a result, population sees a marked expansion. at that placefore, in Marxs eyes, Malthus theory in the capitalists attempt 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 coming through in all aspects of modern society. However, to put one across only one to the current situation is a flawed approach, as there must be a combination of the best elements of the two.