In discussing Federal policy for the frontiers, it has emerged that a glaring discrepancy exists between the formal objectives of the State, and the real development which takes place on the frontier. In Chapter 3, it was observed how Federal minimum price and credit policies, which in principle might prevent the transfer of value from the frontier, can, in fact, promote it; in Chapter 5, it was seen how Federal promises to solve the land problems of the frontier were never fulfilled, or not in time to benefit the peasants on the land. This gap between policy making and policy implementation is clearly revealed on the frontiers, which offer a different perspective on the national political process from that available ‘at the centre’. This perspective may correct possible misconceptions of the centre view: at the centre it may certainly be seen what is said, but on the frontier it is seen what is done. The discussion has referred to the difference between the two in terms of the apparent ‘independence’ of the frontier cycle from policy making in the Federal state.

In explaining the gap, there has been reference to the tendency within the authoritarian State to treat political problems as if they were simply administrative, and to the vulnerability of the State administration to the political pressures of economic groups, operating inside and outside the local state land departments.