It is upsetting that in the modern age, cities are crowded with anti-smoking efforts,
seeking to pollute the minds of fellow citizens with the false and preposterous belief that the
inhalation of smoke is in some way harmful. One can no longer fill his or her car at a gas station
or even go to lunch without being screamed at by posters promoting the idea.
The problem does not lie within the signs themselves, because it is inevitable that
advertisements be always present in our media and money controlled society, but rather within
the lie they promote: cigarettes are harmful.
Contrary to popular belief, “harmful” does not denote only that an event or action
causes harm, but rather that the cons of the event or action outweigh the pros. Was society to
think about the precedent, it may realize that the definition is not applicable under all
circumstances, unlike the one I suggest; every event has a “harmful” effect for someone,
somewhere, in which case every event would be considered harmful. For example, if one is
attacked on the street, and he or she escapes the assailant, who is later arrested, then it would
be considered “harmful” because while the innocent citizen was attacked, but safely got away,
the perpetrator was arrested. However, if one looks at it with the proposed definition, the pros
outweigh the cons, with the innocent escaping and the streets being made safer versus the
criminal being sent to prison (negative from the criminal’s point of view).
I believe it is agreed upon by all members of society that any efforts seeking to
promote lies should immediately be annihilated. However, seeing as the majority of the
earth’s population does not at present time agree that cigarettes have any positive effect,
the aforementioned lie stands as an assumed “truth.” The true truth, however, is far more
enlightening; the world must be well informed of the salutary effects of cigarettes.
Cigarettes are not harmful, but quite the opposite; an increase in their use would
improve the earth: make it a stronger, healthier environment.
Mankind has unknowingly created its savior: cigarettes. Both the United States Census
Bureau and the United Nations estimate that the current human population is over 7 billion
individuals. The estimated carrying capacity of the earth ranges between 4 billion and 16
billion, meaning that human overpopulation may have already occurred. Overpopulation will
result in a decline in the living standard, availability of already scarce jobs, and availability of
land and food. The population will continue to grow until the earth can no longer sustain
human life, and then the population will decline too quickly to control and the human race will
become an endangered species, with too few individuals to rebuild and survive. However,
cigarettes have provided us with a way to humanly decrease the population to a safe and
sustainable size. Were cigarettes to be accepted as good for the world, more people would use
them, which would result in more deaths, and therefore lower the population size. For this
operation to succeed, however, all must encourage their use. Yes, millions of humans would
die, but what do their lives matter? Is not the survival of the human race of greater importance
than the insignificant lives of a couple million, perhaps a billion individuals?
Not only would the promotion of cigarettes decrease the population size by
exterminating those unintelligent enough to smoke them in the first place, but it would in
addition prevent the population from growing due to a high birth rate. Cigarettes can be
offered as a form of abortion, much cheaper than the traditional, more “politically correct”
method used today. Smoking doubles the chance of stillbirth during pregnancy and, if the baby
unfortunately survives, it typically weighs under 5 ½ pounds and is born addicted to nicotine
(dependent upon the toxin to survive). Therefore, the children of smokers are almost
guaranteed to die before reaching the age of three, due to the fact that they either die before
birth, die from health issues such as under developed systems, or die from their dependence on
nicotine.
Cigarettes should be encouraged by the governments of the world and by society
because they will improve the economy. If a large percent of the world’s population smokes
cigarettes, there will be high demand for the product, and therefore, an increase in production.
This means more factories to meet the high demand and therefore more workers. Not only will
cigarettes make more jobs available to the public, they would also provide the government
with a source of high income. If cigarettes were manufactured with more nicotine in them,
therefore creating higher levels of dependence, smokers would be unable to quit. This would
allow the government to place a high tax on cigarettes without fear of losing that income due
to a decrease in smokers who quit because of the taxes. So, quite simply, cigarettes would save
the economy.
Obesity is the most common disease in America. One third of American adults are
considered obese. Once again, cigarettes can solve this problem. Nicotine has been
acknowledged as an appetite suppressant since the early 14th century, among pre-Columbian
Americans and old world Europeans. Smoking cigarettes would decrease American’s
infatuation with eating and therefore decimate the obesity problem.
As aforementioned, an increase in the usage of cigarettes will produce a stronger
population. Most scientists would agree with this statement due to the fact that it is based on
the theory of survival of the fittest, which is accepted worldwide. Were a majority of the world
to smoke cigarettes, the weak, frail individuals whose bodies could not survive the ordeal
would die out, while the strong, who are not affected by the high amounts of smoke, would
survive and continue to populate the earth. However, these survivor’s children would also be
born stronger, with the ability to survive the cigarette smoke, and therefore, overtime, the
population would get stronger. This is following the theory of natural selection, which is the
natural, non-random process by which biological traits become more common based on the
usefulness of their function to the bearers.
This proposition also promotes and utilizes the process of recycling, which is not only
good for the environment, but pleases environmentalists and keeps them quiet. One of the
most commonly used visuals in High School Anti-Smoking campaigns is an example of how
much tar enters one’s lungs after a lifetime of smoking cigarettes, which is presented in the
form of a jar filled to the brim with tar. I propose that when the death of a smoker occurs, we
recycle the tar from their lungs to make new cigarettes, therefore saving the environment while
being conservatives, which the majority of Americans are.
It is a scientifically proven fact that smoking cigarettes increases one’s long term
memory. Not only does smoking make the world stronger, but smarter as well. If students
were to be allowed and encouraged to smoke cigarettes, they would do better in school. The
stereotype is that teenagers who are smoking at the corner gas station are lowlifes who fail all
their classes and drop out of High School, but the truth is they have such high potential because
of their smoking. If all students were to smoke, or the majority, all students would be able to
reach higher and do better in school because of their amplified memory capacity. However,
this point is also applicable to the prior survival of the fittest proposition: students who are able
to defy the stereotype and maximize their increased brain superiority will succeed and
therefore the world will be run by the brightest and strongest individuals. An increase in the
brain function of our youth will also result in a large step forward in technology and therefore a
more advanced society.
Addiction is a weapon that is not fully utilized in the modern age. Smokers are
completely dependent on nicotine, both physically and mentally, and cannot function without
it. When attempting to quit the “bad habit,” the subject going through the process experiences
withdrawal symptoms, which can often have fatal results. I propose that this be utilized as a
source of punishment. Prisons should use cigarettes as a form of punishment by forcing
inmates to experience withdrawal symptoms by cutting off their access to the substance. Then,
at the time of withdrawal decline, meaning that the symptoms begin to wear off, prisons could
force those inmates to smoke, once again manufacturing addiction, only to repeat the process.
It would be a cheap, efficient form of punishment that could be continued for a long period of
time without death. Rehabilitation is possible, if an inmate makes parole.
I propose these actions not for my own personal gain. I have no advantage in the
aforementioned process, but rather would most likely not survive the ordeal, being an
unhealthy adult with severe asthma. I offer these actions merely as a solution to the world’s
problems and to secure the earth as a safe and stable environment for the future generations.
This is a satirical essay.