Development to all asundry is a binding factor of existentialism and the practice of development has taken a big turn with the emergence of mordern age .In the piece below, we observe the significance of development to human society and its general imperativeness to human existence and survival .
Development is the
institutional code of social progress and the ability to sustain growth
over long haul based on the quality of social ideology and existing standard of
capacity building enterprise at a time .How well it is maneuvered determines
how strong a nation can be and wade
through development turbulence .Societies with better perusal grow so quickly
to spread universal development and the decadence rot tens wherein by ethics it is abused which is a function of poor
management of this turbulence gripping development cycles .Getting it right so quickly is the greatest
challenge in the transition of development economy of the world –author .
The practice of development has a long checkered antecedence
down the millennia based on the above
quotations and the subtlety of its
winding turbulence leaves much to be
desired in our world today .World development economy is highly hyper-competitive
and perennially in transition which would persist until the golden age cycle is
attained .Competing for development by competing for tomorrow is the greatest
time investment in the comity of nations
ordinarily raises the bar of development and the quality of development
density existing in a development enterprise that can mustered at a
time .This promotes and enhances the capacity level of capacity building
enterprise itself .The demographical challenges facing world economy and the
leverage of information enterprise required
to stimulate development density
is easily vulnerable in the
bereft of this competition .A derogation somehow that slows down this density .The rarity of developers’ muses
and the mobilization nature of capital into such clime launches outrage and
signifies the extent of the denial-side effect
of competitive advantage hitherto
mortgaged and devitalized by liability
pressure and volatile burden of
development at a particular period .
Nations that thrive on competition foundation do not last the long haul .It seems that the dexterity to mobilize development capacity to boost this density lies in competition incentives .Obviously , since
these incentives hardly survive the long haul ,without a primordial motive
and strategic intent behind development
density , competition foundation
stimulant of development environment
might not also outlive earlier
development mustered in the course of the stimulation cycle period
.Outstretched ideology provides a better benchmark and stresses the quality
beyond the incentives that competition foundation can provide to bridge development that separates
social classes from development market .On the other hand ,the practice of
development besides development cycles ’ trajectory begins from human development or individual incorporation
to material corporation , social , economic and political development
corporation types. This indicates that for the trajectory to evolve or transit
the development cycles , it must ordinarily
by law of development architecture passes through this stimulation cycle
period .Though they operate on the stimulant hurdler’s
framework [SHF/STIHUF] stimulating each
other but they do not really share
similar values during transactional evolution and divergent prices placed on
them vary , to spiral development inequity formation which is the basis of
social inequity .
Even though human development must give up its gain in the venture to contribute its quota to
general development framework in the society, the mutual buying impulse and sale
of needed scale that must be adhered , to
allow such even growth is another matter that can be resolved in a long
statistical proof and link of this error
of omission .The concept of collectivist development architecture or
development neo-collectivism implies that by building impetus from this strategic aggregation , formalizes against such disenabling
incentives that have long truncated the size of development that a nation can
experience at a particular period and the velocity rate through which they are mobilized to bridge
against development arbitraging and holocausting existing in modern society .The elliptic nature of development economy
can be easily understood once this apprehension is built into development
planning and capacity building endeavors .
Development neo-collectivism usurps optimum value accrued to
corporation types and ethics of these unique corporations sacrosanct to their
lever can be lumped together to embody
and accumulate universal developmental values much needed to sustain affordable social life . Development neo-collectivism or the
collectivistic law of development architecture is the foundation of egalitarian social
architecture found wanton today and also the theory of general capacity
oriented to mobilize capital development into golden age development maturing
the cycles through the stimulation cycle period , reducing the cost of
development mobility and accelerates attainment of capital development having
scaled through all development cycles and stages of growth . It assumes that
human developmental values by excesses should ordinarily not dampens the burning motive that
strengthens mobilization fabric of social, economic and political development .
That each corporation types and brands existing in the development economy , should contribute its quota to general ethical guidance that
adhere to stimulant framework of universal development with each brand giving
up their autonomy and values to
sacrifice and contribute to the welfare and for the betterment of the whole .If they cannot grow at the same time
, which is not possible they should endeavor but the gap should be minimal . However, the original leverage must be explored to maintain
ethical composition of development neo-collectivism . The synoptic value
of corporation brands must subscribe to final value of universal development devoid of cumbersome
lapses that may stampede and impede the quality of the stimulation cycle period , to
dovetails collectivist social value .
We need conjugate the concurrence that stimulation
cycle[otherwise also known as middle age cycle ] period
itself shares wide disparity with change cycle that naturally influences
its nature and dimension inducing its steam for it to stimulate effectively
development cycle in the transition period that traverses fate until the golden
age .It connotes that these triple cycle does influence the sovereign fabric of
social life and the underlining forces behind unpredictable nature of
socioeconomic system .As foremost cycle works on the transformation of
development ideology and its social pattern in the transition , it does also
influence the middle age cycle which in
turn also refines , reforms and ensure safe passage of
the development cycles in the safe
transition towards golden age . It is safe to affirm that the security
of change cycle-as an act of mother- nature to prowl at ease usually maintains the
development pattern but the wherewithal
to smoothens the development cycles lies in the maturity of human arts and its
ability to influence the middle age cycle which is impossible without the exemption of static
learning .Effective cycle management can be harnessed by focusing on the
management of stimulation cycle and its smoothening effect on development cycle
trajectory. It therefore behooves since foremost cycle is excluded from the
confines of human control , the two
cycles are inimical to control without affordable information access . The
costly implication of the inherent
information asymmetry involved in the socioeconomic system unleashes
dislocation and gross inequity found in the power market system which is a
mirror of the betrayal of the ethics of
the great charters of liberty .
The modern framework through which
we devolve and evolve social pattern of development in modern age is a repugnant and defeatist to
development collectivism and neo-collectivist enterprise in virtually every
country of the world .Human development grows at a disproportionate rate to
economic ,material social and economic development corporation types . The
similar structural inadequacy that is
common in the web of stimulant framework
to every corporations tends to
derogate the mutual quantity and egalitarian quality of development arbitration that can be obtained by societal fabric
and vital capacity to ensure universal
development . The de-stimulant parity which exchanges inequality among brands overheats the stimulant
framework to slow down development velocity of a nation .There is no doubt that
social behavior is also inimical though also as a facilitator
to the discharge of socioeconomic
development .If human development grows so quickly or too quickly ,it is often at a great cost to a larger segment of the society and the
same pattern is common to other corporation types . This structural
decadence regarded as growth ambiguity
or growth inequity facilitates growth abuse
because these lapses and gap dovetails in the long run to defeat the
essence of development collectivism and neo-collectivist architecture which is
paramount to quicken development velocity and mobility cost .
The aggressive pressure to survival actually stimulates this
growth abuse .Development neo-collectivism when ensured can then promotes development equalitarianism which bridges the
gap between these corporation types. The neocollectivist architecture implies that an increasing disproportionate capacity growth
of corporation types if persist , do not contribute to perennially augmented and
accelerated development cyclical flows and capital development respectively and
mutually in the long run even if sustainable development is sustained .Using
the criteria , the quality of development rests on this independent but unanimous motivation of
development which is defeated as growth abuse flags its flames to deny the
collectivist and the neo-collectivist or egalitarianist enterprise . The
inherent mutual liberal proportion must be contributive to general development
.Where the balance is attained and de stimulant parity expunged , the
collectivist nature of development is
more than possible and growth abuse ,made
alien to stimulant parity framework .The use of Parity signifies the
disenabling of the moral exemption so as to dampen and possibly annihilates
growth abuse . Competition foundation
incentives can also produce or boost
such growth abuse when misappropriated .The value added incentives that
competition foundation provides can be more effectively explored once a
specific ideological pattern and effective
humanitarian strategy is leveraged to
motivate or when appropriate universal
development model has been fiercely identified ,apprehended and utilized .
The disproportionate
ratios between these corporation types offend development pattern and most if not
all do not observe the defective
implication of the destimulant in real developmental strategic practice
and destabilizes the environment of
development and make development
mobilization too costly .It also implies universal capacity must be boosted on the framework for the purpose of
universal development where each brand assumes sacrificial responsibility to work for the glory of common good and
justify their qualitative quota
contribution to universal development .The quantity and quality of development grows sustainbly once the stimulant framework
is modeled to ensure and secure its
parity mobilization via the corporations
and contribute to growth evenly .The worst diatribe ever contrived
against development discourse and planning lies in growth abuse inadvertent usurpation of the
moral authority vital to catalyze capital development and the underestimation of
the cost of growth abuse in an economy . Downturns ,recessions , joblessness
and poverty are graphically tested symptoms of growth abuse which unleashed
development arbitraging and holocausting , once it is sustained in an economy
.Potential development and growth quality and quantity have been ejected
from stimulant cycle devoid of the parity
framework .Whether growth abuses are averted
or not , growing development is a reflection of growing character of a society .
Human society was invented by social development with the
emergence of Neolithic but same clustered with the aggregation of human
development cumulative efforts . Over
time , the division of
lab our , specialization of labour and division into classes as
components to boost changing pattern of development , had
done remarkably well to boost the profile of
development and quantity and quality of growth as man departed from
nature into confucianist age .This boosts development of skills and growth in technical
capacity in the most opportuned segment of the society .The
disproportionate growth in the quality
of labour and quantity of human resources over the long haul tends to perpetrate irreparable
damage and contributes to growing social
inequity into which the most opportune segment
had mortgaged universal welfare for sectarian interests altering the existing
form of social progress as they deem fit . This segment not only
misappropriated the social prosperity but the eruption of growth abuse they
helped perpetrated had persisted from the ancient to the medieval and modern
times .Its cost to development is quite an unfortunate labyrinth to development
economy at large .
From the very inception , sectarian human development rather
than broad based human development [with universal spread ] grew at a disproportionate rate to all
corporation types .And economic development did the same, grew at the same rate
furthering spreading the parity-less destimulation decadence which authors the
arbitraging and holocausting .The
development inequity existing between corporation types betrays the proportion of projected
development colonized by the few .Broad based development in real sense is
a legal process midwived by even growth of corporation types
on the stimulant parity framework .Human development , social ,economic and
political must grow at the same proportion required for effective universal
development and represented of all classes otherwise the few opportune could be
imperial lords of tomorrow to incense social unrest and crisis .Already this
negligible factor have been the basis of all social problems .Equalizing growth among corporations could
lead to eradication of inequity in the stimulant framework first and the eradication of social inequity
existing in the power market system secondly and then the eradication would stream down to human
society where it had much earlier being
perpetrated .In our world today , freedom we mean not just constitutional freedom but freedom golden age
devoid of growth abuse can then be
possible once social inequity is
possibly eradicated .
THE DECLINE OF
DEVELOPMENT COLLECTIVISM
The structural inequity existing on the stimulant framework
was perpetrated due to uncontrollable ego of development evolution and its
uncoordinated changing pattern
In the same way as the Darwinists , the natural selection of
development subscribes to the general notion of how it evolves primitive
pattern into modern pattern possibly onward into golden age pattern .The social
pattern of development markedly grew from communalism through its principles of
social relations which involves family, age
grades and kinship had evolved into to feudal age with stages which
evolved also from clashes between peasants and landlords and then later
landlords and merchants .This happened in feudal societies .With the emergence
of capitalist age and its attendant class contraction , the merchants and the
industrialists carrying over their feudal sentimental and moral psychological contagion turnovers challenging nature through machines for the
first time in mortal history seem to consolidate on the lead in the modern
times .Those who advocated socialism as the last waves were fully convinced
this stimulant inequity can be avoided but
they do not clearly discover growth abuse let alone
recognize how this framework operates and so they propounded Marxism or
communism blindly to deal with the inequality of the ages when they do not know its origin which had become a paramount factor
from the ancient until now .
They failed to diagnose the structural decadence and
inequity existing in human society which was not caused by capitalism though
was worsened by them through technological duress or tech.,imperialism or by using scientific
doctrine of dualism but rather a
dislocation in the stimulant framework ranging from information asymmetry was
responsible for its long stretch throughout all of human history .Infact , to
be precise the power market system
inequity was also caused by it prior to its explosion and manifestation
of its dire effect to be borne by the
socioeconomic system .
The First generation stimulant framework which deals with
broad generation of broad based not sectarian based human development as
society evolved from communalist age
perpetrated this growth abuse .The
depreciation began with this ego stripping because learning grew faster in the
most opportune segment of the society contributing to depreciate and
deteriorate the true values of communalist
age that seriously needed technical
reorientation and polishing , compounded in the feudalistic and
capitalistic epoch .Socialists did not properly understood this depreciation
returns which they linked basically to capitalist epochs and were also affected
by the same abuse which truncated its dignity.
With the emergence of socialist lords ,
attempted drive to proffer solution failed woefully because for the umpteenth
time they could not diagnose the original source of this social inequity
blatantly fell by the way side
.Good philosophy but poor target with poor diagnosis of the social ailment they
intended to solve .The capitalistic era that we are in did less either . The
accumulation of this social ailment –the worst form of cultural hazard carried over
the course of procrastinated period and wasted time was instrumental to long
term protracted social crisis gripping human society .
Having diagnosed the origin of development collectivist
atrophy , we can now proffer necessary solution that will outlive their times as the legacy and common property of
human society .This gives us marsolism to usher in collectivistic and
neo-collectivistic then egalitarianist
era under potage golden templates advocating the roadmap
towards universal prosperity and universal freedom or popularly regarded as
golden age development or civilization [being the last cycle of development
transition ] of man by first banishing
development arbitraging and holocaust that advocate growth abuse in the
non-redistributionist societies of modern times .We preach that the adoption of
great charters of liberty as the constitution of golden age development –being the long term value of capital development must
be endorsed for optimum value .Most specifically , Marxist principle of free
education and free access to information especially its technical assets and the uniform availability
everywhere are pivotal requirement to dismember growth abuse .
In the communalist enclave of the ancient history , the
opportune age grade self-architected the decline of collectivist enterprise due
to lack of effective socio economic model to sustain the epoch and thus using
their social influence intimidated the existing development pattern to give way
to feudalistic epoch .This era was opened by repression of the peasants .The
scientific doctrine of dualism that they preached to intimidate their subjects
, ignited new class of merchants to
struggle with them which previously arose from such repression .When they also
appreciated in social influence as learning and technology grew in their
segment , recourse to use of similar dualistic doctrine ,they were also eventually whisked away unmourned and
unmoored being also the imperial lords of this repressive era .Marx is a good of student
of development natural selection learning from the past opined that the
struggle between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat will continue until the
latter is able to supplant revolution and usurp the capitalists with the same
force .He encouraged unknowingly the usage of this doctrine which is
fundamental to the decline of communalistic into feudalistic and then
capitalist epoch .Marx properly understood that it is a natural law that without
this doctrine the proletariat can not regain control of social system even
though he linked the relevant of force
use to the failure of 1848 revolution .
It must be fully construed that the competition foundation
incentives that catalyzed previous transition of the opportune segment that
later regimented the power market system
from the communalistic to author the feudalistic based on sectarian
interest lacked humane ideological muse inadvertently opted instead for the dualistic doctrine .It
is the origin of social debt and global crisis till date .This is disheartening
given the avarice of human tradition ;that human bias hardly changes once they
are formed .The sectarian human
development that appeared later in the dying end of the communalistic epoch
perpetrated the mutiny to entrench feudalism .Consequently, if we refer to history for a large portion of
Europe after its decline , slavery spread everywhere as man attempted to price
labour .The same was extended to every continent whether by internal or
external chicanery manipulation of evolutionary
social forces . The undue militarization
of human society with the emergence of growth abuse galvanized the breakdown of
atavistic institution of freedom that much earlier underpinned the elementary stages of communalistic era transition and
promoted or authored colonization of development that occurred thereafter to
entrench remorseless social inequity .
The changes in the pattern of development whether
communalistic or feudal etc, was caused by growth in capacity building such as
growth in social formation [-i.e. organization of labour ] and skill formation
induced by pricing of lab our and then increase in the mode of production .This
can be narrowed down to changes in knowledge pattern and ratio of technical
access to information .The section of the society that rapidly explore changes
in this pattern usually have upper hands while the others still persist in
endorsement of static pattern .Such insensitivity informed later exploitation . Revamping the
technology of production is vital to their dominance usurping the power market
system hegemony from which they stranglehold the unknown laws of the market .The
concept of class that began its evolution
in the latter ages of communalism solidified in feudal societies profited
largely from this instrument .The social transformation responsible for
unprecedented social prosperity and capitalist wealth may not be possible
without this concept but however could also be counterproductive especially at this
most critical period of macroeconomic history destroying all the gains ever
accumulated if social tensions persisted as population and social inequity per
population market increase could be calamitous .How workable should I say is the mutual leverage of social
stratification ? .The dual risk involved is not dis-similar to dual gain
potentially untapped.
