To be a state; a government must establish orders, be in control, have a court system, and have a population. I think that the purpose of this article is to inform readers about what it takes to form a state. Fukuyama’s argument is that all tribes will become a state by first possessing a source of authority. Being a state would prevent separation of regions from falling apart or being against each other. States would not hold boundaries based on who's blood is who’s. It would create unity. He also argues that in a social contract, in a time of violence, being a state is the greatest idea because of guaranteed security. Among the tribal societies, they are only secured with limited protection and as for a state there would be unlimited protection because of the rights they give up. I think that Fukuyama is trying to say that when the government is under invasion there would be support and protection at all times. Fukuyama informs the readers by introducing how important having a large population would benefit a state and technological innovations argued by a demographer, Ester Boserup. Having a denser population is a product of growth. Fukuyama shows the idea of human societies engaging with violence and comparing tribal societies it is obviously safer than having to give up tribal equalities for protection. I agree how the author believes that this is why states eventually began to form. It is obvious that there must be resources used to the maximum potential and a population that is willing to be governed for comprehension is order to run a more perfect and satisfied union. It is also obvious that tribes should be willing to move and prosper among a more better climate zones to expand and grow more
To be a state; a government must establish orders, be in control, have a court system, and have a population. I think that the purpose of this article is to inform readers about what it takes to form a state. Fukuyama’s argument is that all tribes will become a state by first possessing a source of authority. Being a state would prevent separation of regions from falling apart or being against each other. States would not hold boundaries based on who's blood is who’s. It would create unity. He also argues that in a social contract, in a time of violence, being a state is the greatest idea because of guaranteed security. Among the tribal societies, they are only secured with limited protection and as for a state there would be unlimited protection because of the rights they give up. I think that Fukuyama is trying to say that when the government is under invasion there would be support and protection at all times. Fukuyama informs the readers by introducing how important having a large population would benefit a state and technological innovations argued by a demographer, Ester Boserup. Having a denser population is a product of growth. Fukuyama shows the idea of human societies engaging with violence and comparing tribal societies it is obviously safer than having to give up tribal equalities for protection. I agree how the author believes that this is why states eventually began to form. It is obvious that there must be resources used to the maximum potential and a population that is willing to be governed for comprehension is order to run a more perfect and satisfied union. It is also obvious that tribes should be willing to move and prosper among a more better climate zones to expand and grow more