4

In Blade Runner 2049, the is a group of "freedom fighter" replicants who hid the (thought to be impossible) offspring of a replicant with the hope that they would — when the time was right — become a sort of symbol and spark a rebellion against their human oppressors.

However, Wallace Corp. is searching for the replicant in question to create a new generation of replicants capable of reproducing.

Why wouldn't the freedom fighters welcome such a development? Surely this new generation would give them hope of multipying to match or exceed humans in number, giving them much better odds in a rebellion?

5

I will use history to answer that. Virginia had the highest slave population of any state in the country in 1860: 490,865. In the same year slaves made up 57 percent of the population in South Carolina.

The last try of slave rebellion in United Stated was made in 1859. By 22 people in Harpers Ferry, Virginia.

If you want freedom you have to fight for it, hence "freedom fighters". You can't just sit and wait for your women to give birth and wait to overpopulate the ones you want to get freed from.

Especially in world of Blade Runner who by default is overpopulated.

And to answer in the spirit of movie. Child bearing replicant would still be considered not human, and Wallace Copr would use is as a free incubator for producing free replicants for them to sell.

Freedom Fighters seen in the fact of being able to reproduce a step to consider them humans. You know, all that gibberish about soul and being born and not produced in plastic bag.

  • Err in the BR world (from the book) it is under populated as the healthy ones have left. The latest film implies that large parts of the world are unhabitable – Neuromancer Feb 21 '18 at 19:50

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .