The evolution of societal constructs has changed significantly throughout human history to support the quality of life of every society. Starting with small, egalitarian groups and adapting to stratified, redistributive societies based on agriculture has significantly changed human civilization. Stratified societies began to rise and dominate to develop our current strata. Stratified agricultural societies have taken over the world and are a necessity for our rapidly growing economy. The more complex our economy becomes, the more stratified it will need to be to maintain the same success as in the past. Stratified societies have taken over the world, which has been necessary for modern societies to survive, as proven by the most powerful countries like the United States. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why violent video games should not be banned”? Get the original essay The complexity and strong structure of stratified societies created more power and helped develop technologies to gain control over others .Diamond's answer for Yali, the new Guinean native, on why white men have so many goods, helped explain how stratified societies triumph over the world. For the most part, “all humans on Earth subsisted exclusively on hunting wild animals and gathering wild plants” (Diamond, 1997: 86). Diamond argued that a village with only hunters and gatherers was successful in terms of survival, but there would need to be animals to hunt and plants to gather on a consistent basis. Successful hunter-gatherer societies are those that have enjoyed a favorable hand. Hunter-gatherers living in more fertile places had advantages that others did not have. Sahlins' article similarly explains how cultures with abundant resources could develop their economic structure and have a more satisfying living environment. He says: “A wealthy society is one in which all the material needs of the people are easily met. » (Sahlins 1974: 1). He added that the Bushmen "...had no sense of ownership." (Sahlins 1974: 12). Therefore, the Bushmen would have no "desires", much less anything that would make them superior to others. The Bushmen considered living to be their main priority. The economic strategy of agriculture and the distribution of labor responsibilities easily outperformed hunter-gatherer societies. Animal husbandry and cultivation was a much more reliable way to support a civilization. The consequences of animal farming were “infectious diseases such as smallpox, measles, and influenza” (Diamond 1997, 92). When immunized people and natives “who had never been exposed to germs met, epidemics resulted…in the death of more than 99 percent of the population” (Diamond 1997, 92). If planned correctly, the regularity and quantity of food surpluses would give civilization more opportunities to develop its economy. One of the reasons why there was no urgency to develop for the New Guinean people was simply because they did not have a sense of potential luxury. this would improve their quality of life. Even if the average hunter and gatherer worked a few hours a day, they would fulfill no desire beyond surviving. Once a few technologies were invented and effective, society had demands to meet. So that these needs areSatisfied, members of society were expected to produce luxury items. The more complex the structure of the economy becomes as the demand for technology increases, the more stratified it will need to become. Almost all modern societies need groups that do not produce and still receive a portion of the surplus in order to remain powerful, organized and grow consistently. Children, babies, people with disabilities, and many others cannot produce basic necessities for others, but they remain essential to society. Caring for others, growing the population, and teaching the next generation are all essential elements of having a prosperous and prosperous society. Diamond recognizes this and agrees that those who are unable to work can still contribute in other ways or may contribute in the future. In order to protect the next generation, Diamond writes: “Goods that exceed an individual's needs must be transferred from the individual to the centralized authority, which then redistributes the goods to deficit individuals” (Diamond 1997, 287). Diamond argues that individuals who are capable, but not contributing, can convince productive, hard-working members of society that they also contribute through management, organization, and so on. Rulers, kings, and lords do not directly contribute to production, but they indirectly help organize those who help support society as a whole. The leader's guiding actions lead farmers to support their society more effectively. Furthermore, Diamond mentions the link between “the spread of government and that of religion” (Diamond 1999: 266). The constructs that government and religion implement in society are in place to remain effective and powerful. Since government and religious leaders create rules and guidelines for the masses, they have a lot of power. Even though managers themselves do not directly influence the production of society, they take a portion of the surplus produced in exchange for their work in organizing others. Diamond argues that the elite has complete control over the masses who actually do the work necessary to survive, but that the elite provides the constructs necessary for a functioning society. The masses may feel that the elite get more than they deserve, but the infrastructure created by the elite is supposed to help the masses improve their quality of life. Unfortunately, the elite tend to protect themselves with guardrails within the infrastructure created when society is not functioning to its full potential or needs. Furthermore, the elite have too much power and there are “wants” that separate the privileged individuals from the masses. The most successful stratified societies are those that have enough infrastructure to be efficient and productive, where the elite can rule the masses, although the masses can still have access to the luxuries that the elite get. When the elite use a hereditary system, it is vital that they remain an upper class in society. Democratic governments share common goals with society and better represent all contributors to that society. Leaders should be elite because of their actions in supporting society, or because the masses want an individual to represent their society. Whether the elite is elected or appointed, their role is to create an economic structure that supports everyone. On the other hand, Diamond explains how the elite can “unabashedly function as kleptocracies, transferring net wealth from commoners to the upper classes” (Diamond 1997: 276). For savings..