Manu Saadia brings up critical points on societal and economic implications in his article “If death becomes optional, will only the rich get to live forever?” I cannot help but to think Saadia is right in inferring that the rich will have a monopoly, or at least much more access, on life extension technology. As Saadia pointed out, poorer people on average die younger than rich people. Additionally, data shows that there are disproportionate rates of queer youth and people of color who are poor and homeless. I cannot help but wonder how access to life extension that is limited to the wealthy will further perpetuate systemic and institutional oppression. Will life-extending advancements just be another way to maintain and gain power over others?
Saadia uses a quote from Steve Jobs to convey his opinion on the topic “death is very likely the best invention of life. It’s life’s change agent. It clears out the old to make way for the new.” I also agree; because the world and society is constantly changing (now more quickly than ever due to advancements in technology). I feel as though the youth will be in touch the most with what social injustices exist and how to fix them. For example, many of us have that well-intended uncle or bigoted grandmother who does not understand the gravity of police brutality on Black lives. Even our parents are out of touch from “hip” lingo and social media platforms. If people who are currently in power live forever (or for a very long time), they may push for initiatives and beliefs that are outdated, irrelevant, and/or harmful to those less privileged.