Jackson Ribler Dr. Weisband Nations and Nationalities 16 Sept 2018 Cultural Shifts in Developing Countries The longevity of a monarchy is dependent upon the monarch’s ability to successfully coordinate resources in surplus against the demands of aristocracy. In states where monarchy is unsuccessfully imposed, surplus is squandered amongst patrimonial fathers and sectional tensions remain unsettled because there lacks a strong national identity as in Pakistan. Accordingly, states with a refined history of centralized rule, such as Bhutan, exhibit healthier transitions into democracy and achievement culture, while other countries whose dynastic rulers were unable to wholly centralize face instability, and retain a culture bound by blood and based on shame. Bhutan is a small Buddhist constitutional monarchy considered to be the most geographically and culturally isolated nation in the modern world. It maintains a friendly relationship to its southern neighbor India, receiving military support and furnished goods. To the north, the Kingdom maintains a strained relationship to its new neighbor, the Republic of China, which annexed Tibet in the late twentieth century. Rich in timber, fertile ground, and other easily accessible natural resources, Bhutan lavishes in its natural wonder. After the recent expulsion of the Lhotshampa, Bhutan has become one of the most monolithic countries in the world in religion and ethnicity (“The World Factbook: BHUTAN”) (“Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2009”). Bhutan is a centralized nation wherein the ruler coordinates the division of labor. Pakistan is an Arabic state formerly controlled by the British Empire until it became a self-styled “Islamic Republic”. It struggles with terrorism, territorial disputes with its neighbor India, and structural problems within its governance. Pakistan’s natural resources have not been easily accessible to Pakistanis for the duration of their history i.e. fossil fuel. The overwhelming majority of the population is Muslim, and the official religion is Sunni Islam which causes some tensions between the two largest ethnic groups Punjabis and Pashtuns (“The World Factbook: PAKISTAN”). Pakistan is a country wherein patrimonial fathers (leaders of clans, families and ethnic groups) have refused to cede power to a central authority. In the absence of a centralizing authority, an uncoordinated attempt to divide labor is made amongst a group of patrimonial leaders on their own which retains a culture built around sustainability while living in a world where the region might otherwise thrive. Only under the even hand of a unifying monarch can a state become a nation, can resources yield their fullest potential, and a collective culture of shame learn to value the individual. Shame/honor cultures are based on the belief that identity and a sense of belonging come from their lineage, ancestors, and congenital socio-economic status. In these cultures, father figures dominate the political sphere and flow of intergenerational resources in an attempt to survive. However, Nation-states emerge in nations of surplus when an established national identity meets a strong central government. Thus, the central ruler and the clan leader have opposing interests in coordinating labor. Pakistan lacks a sense of nationality where Bhutan succeeds in creating an identity for its people. Pakistan has been a sovereign state for decades but has been a province of several larger empires and a decentralized collection of peoples for centuries. (Askari 2015) Bhutan maintains a strong sense of national identity coherent with its religious identity by reinforcing its use of the Dzongkha language, use of public education, efforts in isolating itself from foreign influence, and the downplayed role of patrimonial fathers in favor of the king (Norwich 2009). Although both maintain stringent borders, Pakistanis develop differing views of who they are within their own border. Both Bhutan and Pakistan are defined by their religious practices when compared to their neighbors. India is a mostly Hindu nation that separates both from Bangladesh whose official religion is Sunni Islam. Bhutan is the product of rulers centralizing and consolidating powers of fiefdoms within a Himalayan valley. Pakistan is a collection of differing peoples practicing the same religion and whose hallmark in national identity is their differences with India (Coomar 2004). Pakistan exists more as a religious identity than it does as a national identity. Before the early 1600s, Bhutan was an assortment of small conflicting fiefdoms, until the region was unified by Tibetian lama and militant Ngawang Namgyal. The leader set out to create a multitude of fortresses and codified law that effectively centralized Bhutan (Berthold 2005). Although this statehood would only last until Namgyal’s death, it laid the foundation for a national identity for all the Bumthang valley. While the warring factions would fight within the Bumthang valley and with neighboring states, fiefs shared the ambition of ruling over Bhutan as a whole as the sole, central ruler. This was until moot was convened in 1907 to elect the first King. Seizing a myriad of resources, the royal House of Wangchuk slowly eliminated the powers of the lower fiefs and established itself as prominent source of theocratic dynastic rule – binding their sovereignty in both Wangchuck blood and their divine right. Even today, Bhutan’s fifth king maintains a special place to the Bhutanese people as a religious figure, a culturally significant figure, and an idol to be worshipped. In fear of sharing Tibet’s same fate of annexation by Red China, the fourth King of Bhutan entered diplomatic ties with European nations under the addendum that Bhutan establish a constitutional democracy in 2008. Elections have taken place ever since. There have been changes in legislative majorities and the monarchy has slowly become more ceremonial over time (Matthew 2006). Bhutan is able to westernize because of its potent connection between the Bhutanese people and government. In 1956, the movement for a separate state to be carved out of northwestern India for Muslims came to fruition. In speaking to the people of what is today Pakistan, Muhammad Ali Jinnah professed many times that religion should not be the sole structure of government but confessed that Islamic values would make up the codified law for the nation to be, considerably conceding to Muslim Nationalism. The first Pakistani President was disposed of in a military coup by a faction of Muslim nationalists (Paracha 2016). In 1962 a new constitution was formed, championing a modern take on Islam with room for reform. Modern Bangladesh (although separated by India) was still considered East Pakistan. After this new constitution, sectionalism emerged. (Choudhury 1967). Separatists secured an independent Bangladesh. The only underlying similarity between the two nations was their majority Muslim populations. Arguably, that same religious tie is what constitutes the government of Pakistan and as the sole proprietor of nationhood and is not strong enough to convey a sense of nationality. There is only a distinct sense of non-Indian, Muslim pride. Pakistan has suffered multiple legitimacy crises of government, military coups, and periods of instability. Patrimonial fathers, ethnic leaders, warlords, and other constructions of decentralized government are the primary drivers behind culture and action. The result is that a culture centered around scarcity has remained. Pakistan’s westernization is thwarted by patrimonial fathers holding legitimacy and authority over the state. The division of labor in an economy of early surplus is a defining moment in any country’s history. Once under the rule of a British monarch, Pakistan saw no centralization as resources were not coordinated for the Pakistanis but for extraction by their colonial rulers. The colonial period in British India/Pakistan thoroughly stunted its economic growth. Bhutan’s isolation from second wave colonialism gave the second and third kings the ability to network and control the nation’s resources. As well taking increased power over the fiefs by taxation of rice and conscription of farmers (Coomar 2004). Currently, there is an increased sense of economic mobility in the country and it utilizes its surplus of resources. Steadily, the Bhutanese have been opening more opportunities for post-secondary education and families are not as expectant for their children to maintain their ascribed status. They are beginning to experience the personal freedom to choose and aspire their station in the workforce. In ascription culture, people are not valued for their potential but for their born-station wherein they continue the work of their fathers without pursuing vocational passions. In achievement culture, individuals seek fulfillment through aspiring to a higher station in life doing what they are passionate about. Marriage for shame cultures are a way of maintaining stability for the good of the clan. Marriage for achievement cultures are a luxury, a romantic expression of personal desire. In Pakistan arranged marriage, dowry, and prominence of the fathers have continued as a way for groups to manage their resources intergenerationally. (Khan 2017) In Bhutan, there came about an age of Romantic love and conquest and in the 1960s when the phenomena of ‘Hunting’ came along – sneaking into lover’s houses to fornicate. (Dorji 2009) As a result, premarital sex and selection of one’s own spouse have become increasingly socially acceptable. Divorce is acceptable and the nation has a nuanced vision of possession and property that is not patrilineal. (Zeppa 1999). When individuals in cultures like Pakistan defy honor codes, they face the wrath of their society in ways such as honor killings for extramarital affairs. Whereas, personal aspiration is not in the best interest of the collective. These punitive measures served a purpose (although are not rectified) at a time of scarcity but are seen as antediluvian when surplus permits persons live without honor codes. There is no place for the individual in shame culture. Only in a liberal society and a market economy can the individual embrace their realest self. In the absence of a centralizing authority, an uncoordinated attempt to divide labor is made amongst a group of patrimonial leaders on their own which retains a culture built around sustainability while living in a world where the region might otherwise thrive. Only under the even hand of a unifying monarch can a state become a nation, can resources yield their fullest potential, and a collective culture of shame learn to value the individual. Works Cited Berthold, John. Bhutan: Land of the Thunder Dragon . Wisdom Publications, 2005. Choudhury, G. W. Documents and Speeches on the Constitution of Pakistan . Green Book House, 1967. Khan, Khzir. An American Family . Thorndike Press, 2017. Matthew, Joseph C. “Economic & Political Weekly.” 8 Apr. 2006. Mehta, Ashok K. “Handle with Care, Bhutan Is a Friend.” The Pioneer , 24 July 2013, www.dailypioneer.com/2013/columnists/handle-with-care-bhutan-is-a-friend.html. Norwich, John Julius. “Subscribe to the FT to Read: Financial Times Bhutan’s Unique Identity.” Financial Times , Financial Times, 3 July 2009, www.ft.com/content/6d85ac46-6764-11de-925f-00144feabdc0. Paracha, Nadeem Farooq. End of the Past: an Immediate Eyewitness History of a Troubled Nation . Vanguard Books, 2016. Penjore, Dorji. Love, Courtship and Marriage in Rural Bhutan a Preliminary Ethnography of Wamling Village in Zhemgang . Galing Printers and Publ., 2009. Rizvi, Hasan Askari. “Was Pakistan Sufficiently Imagined before Independence?” The Express Tribune , 23 Aug. 2015, tribune.com.pk/story/943379/was-pakistan-sufficiently-imagined-before-independence/. Sinha, Awadhesh Coomar. Himalayan Kingdom Bhutan: Tradition, Transition, and Transformation . Indus Pub. Co., 2004. United States, Congress, Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor. “Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2009.” Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2009 , U S Govt. Printing Office, 2012. Weisband, Edward, and Courtney Irene Powell. Thomas. Political Culture and the Making of Modern Nation-States . Routledge, 2016. “The World Factbook: BHUTAN.” Central Intelligence Agency , Central Intelligence Agency, 23 Aug. 2018, www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/bt.html. “The World Factbook: PAKISTAN.” Central Intelligence Agency , Central Intelligence Agency, 10 Sept. 2018, www.cia.gov/library/publications/resources/the-world-factbook/geos/pk.html. Zeppa, Jamie. Beyond the Sky and the Earth: a Journey into Bhutan . Chalkstream, 2009.