In order to distract the diseased from the safe areas, innocent individuals can be left in the regions that are unprotected by the government. While distraction from the threat spares the lives and ensures the wellbeing of those within the safe zones, the portion of the population that is neglected face a cruel and tragic fate. The value of life seemingly always comes into question in times of crisis, taking into account “population size, bias toward immigrants, and production complementarity between native population and immigrants” the national government enacts an almost godlike involvement in the judgment of the lives of its population (Fujita and Weber). In short, by setting up not all inclusive refuges, the ruling body essentially decides that some of the population be preserved while others, those deemed not worthy, are left to their own devices, implying that they are dismissed by the government to face a tragic fate. This opens the moral issue that some lives may prove as more valuable than others, giving the government, at a national level, to decide who has more of a right to live over …show more content…
The use of total war, as seen in the novel, removes the emotional connection between people, an aura of hatred and pain, and a void of happiness (Healy). Similar to World War II, collective measures such as peace gardens, citizen patrol, conservation of resources, along with other means that could possibly aid the war efforts were instated (Trey). The “Re-education Act” instated within World War Z served to add to the anti-insurgency countermeasures, training civilians to help working towards one specific cause. After the outbreak, the need for intellectual skills declined and need for physical abilities massively increased, once again contributing to the offensive route being taken by the government. These eventually prove most effective, almost entirely resulting in the irradiation of the diseased at the conclusion of the