This kind of off-the-cuff number crunching was common in political writing of the time period. On one occasion he Johnathan Swift wrote Modest Proposal with the idea to better humanity. This opportunity may have included giving the farmers more coin to work for, diversifying their professions, or even consider enslaving their people to lower coin usage and build up financial stock in Ireland. They would rather the children and their parents to be helped by the ones that are actually responsible. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 2003.
The essay progresses through a series of surprises that first shocks the reader and then causes her to think critically not only about policies, but also about motivations and values. He is not willing to entertain any other arguments for solving the problem, like virtue and thrift. He points out that they are unfit for any employment, being even too young to steal. Swift goes on to shock the readers by describing in detail what kind of disgusting things people would do to the flesh of the infants. He wrote this essay to show how ignored and bad the state of Ireland and its social classes are. Firstly, the plan will greatly reduce the number of Papists Catholics in Ireland—a wicked group.
He sums up by saying he has no personal stock in enacting this system as he has no young children, and his wife is past childbearing age. Yet Swift's declaration that the British landlords have already 'devoured' the Irish economically implies that his proposal to eat their children is no more than a more literal continuance of what is already happening. This is, in fact, a political satire which gave him immediate popularity. The profits overall will boost the Irish economy, as the children are an entirely domestic product, their flesh being too delicate to export. Another rhetorical device that Jonathan Swift use in his work is irony.
In the essay, Swift advocates that the penurious Irish should sell their babies to the rich ladies and gentlemen and obtain monetary power required to ease their economic predicaments. By this trade of flesh of infants, other infants can be provided food and clothes for at least one-year, which are on sale and also for those children who are to be grown up for the sake of further breeding. Unfortunately, similar to livestock, children are doomed to be treated as marketable objects. Jonathan swift begins by mocking and blaming the mothers of the children by telling them that they should engage or find themselves in working to earn an honest living instead of strolling to beg for alms. His proposal, in effect, is to fatten up these undernourished children and feed them to Ireland's rich land-owners. He stands to gain nothing personally from his plan, as his own child is no longer an infant, and his wife is now too old to bear more children.
These gnawing bunch of kids not just pose a problem to their parents who have to think about ways to keep their gobs munching, but are a major contributing factor for the kingdom's undoing. By comparing the speaker and the group of people he tries so hard to be a part of, with the upper class of Ireland, Swift shows that they are quite similar in their selfish plans and actions. One way he does this is by saying innocent children are in fact the only ones guilty for the impoverishment of Ireland. Stereotypes against Irish Catholics make it easier for Swift to use them as the subject of his satire. Swift makes his point by stringing together an appalling set of morally-untenable propositions in order to cast blame far and wide. He admits that it will result in a decrease in the number of inhabitants of Ireland, but he believes this practice will unite the people that remain due to the improved conditions and pride they take in the improvement of their nation. In this essay, Jonathan Swift writes as if he were being completely serious.
The overall idea of overpopulation comes from the stereotype that Catholics tend to have a lot of children. Lastly, of putting a spirit of honesty, industry, and skill into our shop-keepers, who, if a resolution could now be taken to buy only our native goods, would immediately unite to cheat and exact upon us in the price, the measure, and the goodness, nor could ever yet be brought to make one fair proposal of just dealing, though often and earnestly invited to it. He is overdramatic in his statements and this paired with his lack of logic makes him a very untrustworthy proposer. This illustrates that the narrator? Swift intended to parody similar pamphlets that were being circulated at the time. He gives a line of logical ideas and proposals but then says how they are all ridiculous when compared to his idea of eating children. Swift finally gets down to some real arguments when the narrator lists all the arguments that he will not give any time to. The 1726 paper acknowledges women's interests and — while not being a complete satirical text — has also been discussed as an inspiration for Jonathan Swift's title.
At the time he was writing, abolishing the religion would have been absurd. He sarcastically explains that it was easy to try and get rid of a social problem with a fast cheap way, and to feel indifferent about poor people. His focus on the youth and poor conditions of life would most likely have drawn in the public to consider what he would later propose, as they are issues that were prevalent and of dire need of solution. This is an ironic request for the Proposer to make, because all the evidence suggests that he himself has never spoken to any poor Irish people, much less consulted them about his plan. Outside of the realm of English studies, A Modest Proposal is included in many comparative and global literature and history courses, as well as those of numerous other disciplines in the arts, humanities, and even the social sciences. Neither will merchants buy or sell children.
In agreement with Johnson, Donald C. They were burdened to their parents. There could be a great inducement to marriage. The human tie to the wellbeing of children would inspire the British. His aim was not to solve the problems in Ireland but to expose the ridiculousness of quick-fix schemes proposed by politicians and officials to relieve all of the social problems in Ireland. He also blames the Irish Catholics that allowed English policy to break down Ireland. This is probably to prepare us to go through his plan.