Egalitarian Society Analysis

1. The idea of equality when referring to egalitarian societies is used to describe the fact that these societies have no formal division of power or access to resources as other societies might have. That is to say, no one group will have barred access to resources. Everyone will have access to food and other necessary resources. For example, in “Marriage and the politics of yams” by Annette B. Weiner, we learn that every single married woman in the Trobrianders of Papua New Guinea is guaranteed yams, which are both of monetary value and for sustenance uses, but some women will get more yams because they have more people tending yam gardens to them for whatever reason. All women will have access to the same resources, and some women and their spouses will have access to more plentiful resources, but no one is denied access based off class or rank. Therefore that is not to say there is no discrepancy among people within an egalitarian society. People can have access to more resources or possess more prestige as distinguished by age, ability and sometimes gender. However, nothing in egalitarian societies is decided by formal heredity. There could be leaders of the group that are in that position because they have proven they are a capable leader, and when they die their son or daughter could be considered for a similar position, however it is not guaranteed they will get the position. And it is also not guaranteed there will be a leader of any sort. The group could make all decisions if that’s how the society works. We see an example ability being able to elevate one’s status within an egalitarian in the article “Parent-Offspring Conflict in Marriage” by Polly Wiessner. In the article Wiessner discusses the facts that the parents i...

... middle of paper ...

...onsible for making sure that their people pay tribute (i.e. taxes) and negotiating with other groups (i.e. foreign affairs.) The fact that the position is hereditary though is the exact opposite of how the American political system works. Term limits also provide a big difference between chiefdoms and the modern American political system. A chief is in power until he dies or is killed, but most American political officials in the legislative and executive branches are only there for 2-6 years at a time with some having the chance to be reelected. The fact that chiefs hold the position for life is similar to the fact that U.S. Supreme Court judges hold their position for as long as they see fit or until they die. However still, no one in the American political system is there because of hereditary reasons. Everyone supposedly gets to office on his or her own accord.