The manner in which leadership and formation of governance is done are different in various regions around the world. Different systems and techniques are applied to govern people in different countries. More about a different type of government leadership we can see from the clips which show the form of government and leadership that was practiced by the Samoan people ( Huffer, & So'o, 2005) . The manner in which the Samoan government operates within the island is very different from the way the typical American leadership.
From the video clip, we can see that the traditional leadership of the Samoan villages is very different from that of the American and this is what caused a conflict when the American government sent their representatives to oversee the island. The Americans had their own notion of how a government should operate which is different from the manner in which the Samoan village was headed. According to the Americans, the government should be made up of some basic structures. In the American notion, there should be three branches of the government which are the executive branch, Legislative branch, and the judicial branch. In this structure, the executive is made up of the president of the country, the vice president, and the cabinet ( Hassall, & Mae, 2018) . They manage key functions and carry out the laws. The legislative is made up of the House of Representatives, congress, and the senate. They all work together to make laws and pass bills ( Hassall, & Mae, 2018) . The judicial branch is made up of the Supreme Court and other levels of courts within the country. They mainly work to evaluate the laws of the country and offer justice. This is very different from the traditional Samoan leadership which is not so much detailed and the chief performs various functions. For example, the chief will oversee all the economic activities and still be the one to help with the matter of justice that affects the people within the borders. The chief is related to most people and performs multiple tasks affecting people.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The other major difference between the traditional leadership of the Samoan villages from that of the typical American leadership is the manner in which people become leaders. In traditional Samoan leadership, there is no practice of democracy as people do not vote. The chiefs are either appointed or come from a given lineage. The appointment is done by elders who are assumed to be wise or other chiefs. In the typical American leadership, most political posts are obtained from elections where people vote for their leaders ( Rothbart, 2019) . High rank in the Samoan leadership depends on the family connection ability and selection by other chiefs. On the other hand, the high rank depends on the rank or level of the leadership as stipulated by the law, qualification of the contestant, and the ability to articulate good manifesto.
The traditional system of chiefly governance that was practiced in Samoa reinforced close-knit with social system within the village using a very special manner. One major way was through the ceremonies that were carried out in the village. The ceremonies were attended by the village people in a given area where people could gather and celebrate together. It was referred to as the ‘chiefly Monos feast’. This brought many villages together and high generosity was always showed at this moment. People could bring different types of foods and feast together with others including the chief of the village. Different families served the chief with special foods and also offered presents to the chief during this feast. The size of the prize that was given to the chief had many symbols that could be interpreted. The size symbolized the importance of the person who gave it and also the one who receives it.
The values of ascription and achievement operated in a manner that is very different from the leadership situations that is practiced in America and other places around the world where the government operations have been modernized. In Samoan leadership, people became members of the community or leadership by birth ( Huffer, & So'o, 2005) . If you are born in the area then you are legitimately a member of the community and anything to do with leadership can affect you. People born on the island were considered to be members of that community by birth. In the video clip, we can see the chief saying that they do not want to change the manner in which they are doing things and the form of leadership that they are practicing. They do not want to do what the Americans want them to do because they identify themselves as Samoan people from the island and not Americans. The leadership in Samoa has assigned its people social status on the basis of birth. The member of Samoan leadership had a tendency of achievement values with merits that were based on social status. People earned these positions based on their hard work, the relationship between themselves, and decisions. On the other hand, this is opposed to the leadership in America which is considered to be modern. In America's leadership, people can be assigned a social status based on different options and it does not depend on birth only ( Rothbart, 2019) . It depends on things such as birth, registration, and many more forms. In one hand, the traditional Samoan leadership, they call each other brother and sisters. On the other hand, Americans refer to other people as strangers if they do not know you whether you are from America.
It is due to this brotherhood notion that even feasts were carried out and prizes given to the chief. The Samoan treated every person with great generosity. The feasts meant a lot not only to the people but also to the chief. The feast illustrated chief’s traditional obligation of redistribution of wealth in the community in various ways. Through the feasts, the chief could see what could be produced in various areas that he governs. Through this, the chief could be in a position to determine which areas produce more wealth and the areas that do not produce much wealth. It was the responsibility of the chief to distribute wealth in the society and this information was important since they could know the areas that are suffering and needs to be supplied with resources in the society ( Hassall, & Mae, 2018) . This could help with equal distribution of wealth so that people from some areas suffer as other people continue enjoying. This practice has a positive implication for the economic and political conflicts. It helps in boosting the economy and at the same time reduces political conflicts.
Apart from Samoa, there are also other regions around the world where such cases such as feasts were carried out and they meant a lot to the leadership. An example is the Philippine feast celebrations which were done in different seasons ( Hassall, 2019) . In Philippine, celebrations were done from long ago and it was mostly done to express gratitude for good harvests. It was always carried out in honor of leaders and could be used to communicate a lot. It could show the status of the economy and also the areas that were placed at a better place regarding the distribution of food and other resources.
Reference
Hassall, G. (2019). Conflict in the Pacific: challenges for governance. https://openresearch-repository.anu.edu.au/bitstream/1885/157760/1/201_conflict.pdf
Hassall, G., & Mae, P. (2018). Traditional leaders and local government in Pacific Island countries. The Routledge Handbook of International Local Government , 38-53.
Huffer, E., & So'o, A. (2005). Beyond governance in Sāmoa: understanding Samoan political thought. The Contemporary Pacific , 311-333. https://www.jstor.org/stable/23722058?seq=1
Rothbart, D. (2019). State Domination and the Psycho-politics of Conflict: Power, Conflict and Humiliation . Routledge.
Samoa Traditional leadership Video. Link https://cdnapisec.kaltura.com/index.php/extwidget/preview/partner_id/1700302/uiconf_id/25562362/entry_id/0_40rgnt7z/embed/dynamic
