ravage , yeah that was a good post, very to the point. Now is there any truth that fuedals have stopped development in their areas and closed off education opportunities to maintain their stronghold? i mean we hear it all the time but so far I have not seen any proof of that
there probably is some truth to the idea that feudals would block certain kinds of development in order to maintain a stronghold. i mean it makes intuitive sense from a self interest perspective of a feudal to do so, although i have no evidence for it. ehtasab says there is, i believe him since it makes sense.
however even then I dont really see the need for Government intervention. I do not believe there is a sizeable proportion of the population in rural areas that cant move around if they so choose. so long as they are free to move around, and assuming other areas of the country are outstripping their area in terms of levels of development with this one guy holding down the fort, they'll just abandon him. I dont believe ties of lord and thrall are strong enough to last in the face of otherwise ubiquitous prosperity.
after all people move from rural to urban areas for this very reason, and pretty much abandon feudal relationship thereafter, aside possibly from voting time (which isnt a huge issue imo). the key is just for rural areas to be developed, with good economic policies, develop the areas that can be developed, and there is reason to hope that social change will be a by product.