Perhaps you saw this video last September, when it went viral: The two most powerful autocrats in the world — Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin, both of whom have been heads of state for well over a decade, and neither of whom shows any signs of intending to relinquish that power — caught by an interpreter’s hot mic discussing their own apparent shared desire for immortality. The New York Times
Learning Objectives
Students will be able to:
- Interpret the central argument of a long-form journalistic essay
- Analyze how the author connects science, power, ethics, and politics
- Evaluate how longevity technologies challenge ideas of democracy, equality, and historical change
- Develop argumentative essay responses grounded in detailed textual engagement
But what if the tyrant succeeds in making himself immortal, or in expanding his allotted life span so radically that he might as well be? What if autocrats like Xi or Putin were to extend their rule by decades, or even to rule indefinitely, never relinquishing their grip on their respective states, on the lives of their citizens? Such a prospect is, to say the least, still scientifically remote. But that these two leaders seem to want it in the first place, and seem to believe that science might facilitate it, suggests something important about our political era — and hints at the shape of the era to come. The New York Times
Read the whole article
A central part of this lesson is the requirement that students read the article in full. Long-form journalism develops its meaning gradually: through structure, examples, counterarguments, and shifts in perspective that cannot be grasped through excerpts or summaries alone. By engaging with the entire text, students practice sustained attention and critical reading, and are better able to understand how complex arguments about power, technology, and ethics are constructed over time. This depth of reading is essential for meaningful reflection, discussion, and essay writing in this lesson.
Find the whole article here: “The Rich and Powerful Want to Live Forever. What if They Could?” From the Kremlin to Silicon Valley, some of the most powerful people in the world now want something more: eternal life. The New York Times
Task Overview
Students work in small groups (3–4) to map the article’s argumentative structure.
Each group completes the following:
1. Central Claim
- What is the article ultimately warning against?
- Phrase the author’s core claim in one sentence.
2. Supporting Arguments
Identify at least three arguments the author makes, for example:
- Political implications of extended life spans for authoritarian leaders
- Ethical consequences of extreme inequality in access to longevity technologies
- Historical role of death in limiting power and enabling change
Essay questions
- The article argues that research into extreme longevity is closely tied to wealth, political power, and existing global inequalities. Discuss the ethical problems that could arise if the ability to significantly extend human life were available mainly to the richest or most powerful individuals. In your essay, consider how extended lifespans for elites might affect democratic institutions, economic opportunity, generational change, and access to health care for ordinary citizens.
- The prospect of radical life extension raises fundamental questions about what gives human life meaning. Would a significantly longer life necessarily be a better one? Drawing on the article, discuss both the potential benefits of extended lifespan and the possible personal, social, and moral costs it might entail.