Past and Present Politics and Development Research Paper

Past and Present Politics and Development - Research Paper Example In his tour, he learnt that the natives were always hostile to the new people who purportedly brought in new blood into the political organization and development practices of the natives. In the early years, missionaries played a predominant role in changing the political and organizational scenario of the places where they went. The traveling of missionaries to places that had not developed economically marked the beginning of civilization and modernization in most undeveloped or underdeveloped societies. It was only after the insurgence of missionaries that native undeveloped societies began to embrace peace, governance, professionalism such as teaching, soldiers, doctors and bureaucrats all of whom contributed to the common good of the societies. Diamond (1999) believed that the first step to the true development of the society was through the practice of agriculture on commercial basis. Given that the ancient people and not so long ago the undeveloped states had no regular econo mic specialization and land was subdivided among group members and subgroups, the political organization was considered egalitarian. ... d since Eurasia which was blessed with local/indigenous domestic able grain cereals and animals that facilitated traction animals like the donkeys and bulls. This encouraged the development of commercial large scale agriculture which enabled economic growth and also stratified societies such that there emerged social classes. Reasons for Lack of Single or Complex \political Organizations Although Diamond argued that states â€Å"expand and develop based on their level of agricultural practice and that this happens in a virtuous circle† (1999, p. 266), there have been occurrences that counter his argument which in Diamond’s view was assumed and therefore needs to be added to the theory of why states develop and expand. Therefore, it implies that, instead of states eventually growing to large and more complex organizations, there is either unequal growth of societies into becoming on single large complex organization or eventual stagnation of states. This lack of large an d more complex organizations are attributed to internal factors within the States themselves; a fact Diamond does not incorporate in his theory. The first reason is based on the fact that political organizations are slowly, but steadily emerging that is not necessarily egalitarian in nature. In other words the states themselves are greedy and are often unwilling to distribute public funds that are supposed to facilitate growth of complex organizations. Secondly, given the divergent states interests, it is hard or perhaps impossible for the world to attain a single world or complex organization that Diamond proposes (Diamond 1999, p. 290). In the face of democracy and human rights, political organizations and by far autonomy is slowly revolving into a new era of leadership and political authority. In the