In this essay, I will explain the geographical theory to Development, as advanced by Diamond (1997), some criticisms to it and why, overall, it's still the strongest theory, when combined with others, to why some countries are wealthier and unquestionably more advanced than others are.
There have been many theories posited as to why some countries are developed and wealthy, whilst other countries either remain underdeveloped even now, or were only developed through colonialism by more developed western countries, and not through their own produce.
In Guns, Germs and Steel, Diamond (1997) argues that rather than any racial supremacy, or a religious cultural reason, countries which became developed did so simply because their geographical …show more content…
Another view is advanced by Lewis (2002) in the book 'What Went Wrong? Western Impact and Middle Eastern Response'.
He argues that social Liberty deprivation, as pointed out in the Middle East, decreases a country's chance to be developed properly. Many islamic countries not only are ranked lowest on personal liberty on multiple world indexes though also then search out external scapegoats, especially Jews and westerners and imperialism, to blame as to their own inability to succeed properly. This then creates a vicious circle, as they don't address the problems which make them underdeveloped and they become a more extreme police state resultingly.
Another issue which causes the Middle eastern cultures to be underdeveloped is the treatment of women in those societies and the inability women have to work in many and in some are not even allowed to drive.
When such a large segment within a country's population are unable to work, and thus contribute to that society's development and economy, they will likely develop at a much slower rate than a society where the whole population are able to contribute without …show more content…
US Department of State (2015) published a human rights report which heavily criticised the human rights practices in the south East Asian country, Singapore. In that report, they discuss what they consider the restrictive laws which Singapore has as compared with various other countries. And yet Singapore remains an economic powerhouse which contradicts the claim that a police state can not be a success developmentally.
I disagree with Department of State (2015) because the report ignores Singapore's uniquely cosmopolitan situation with multiple religions and multiple ethnic groups together, with all people pursuing a capitalist result, which have made Singapore have to adopt stricter laws in order to keep a social cohesion which would likely not be possible without such
There have been many theories posited as to why some countries are developed and wealthy, whilst other countries either remain underdeveloped even now, or were only developed through colonialism by more developed western countries, and not through their own produce.
In Guns, Germs and Steel, Diamond (1997) argues that rather than any racial supremacy, or a religious cultural reason, countries which became developed did so simply because their geographical …show more content…
Another view is advanced by Lewis (2002) in the book 'What Went Wrong? Western Impact and Middle Eastern Response'.
He argues that social Liberty deprivation, as pointed out in the Middle East, decreases a country's chance to be developed properly. Many islamic countries not only are ranked lowest on personal liberty on multiple world indexes though also then search out external scapegoats, especially Jews and westerners and imperialism, to blame as to their own inability to succeed properly. This then creates a vicious circle, as they don't address the problems which make them underdeveloped and they become a more extreme police state resultingly.
Another issue which causes the Middle eastern cultures to be underdeveloped is the treatment of women in those societies and the inability women have to work in many and in some are not even allowed to drive.
When such a large segment within a country's population are unable to work, and thus contribute to that society's development and economy, they will likely develop at a much slower rate than a society where the whole population are able to contribute without …show more content…
US Department of State (2015) published a human rights report which heavily criticised the human rights practices in the south East Asian country, Singapore. In that report, they discuss what they consider the restrictive laws which Singapore has as compared with various other countries. And yet Singapore remains an economic powerhouse which contradicts the claim that a police state can not be a success developmentally.
I disagree with Department of State (2015) because the report ignores Singapore's uniquely cosmopolitan situation with multiple religions and multiple ethnic groups together, with all people pursuing a capitalist result, which have made Singapore have to adopt stricter laws in order to keep a social cohesion which would likely not be possible without such