Anti-politics machine uses political decisions to allocate resources in a way that appears to provide technical answers to methodical questions. Some of the questions addressed using the anti-politics device are land reallocation to a limited number of select few, which is justified by the necessity to sustain commercial livestock management. Due to such an approach, land allocation to a few leads many men to be deprived of their retirement savings. The governments, therefore, achieve power using failed development schemes since projects are objective and neutral. Thus, the main characteristic of the anti-politics machine is that failure is a standard norm since the governments do not decentralize and popularize participation among the people. The other feature of the anti-politics device is its inability to eliminate poverty; instead, it reinforces and expands bureaucracy.
For example, in Lesotho, the development workers sought to answer technical challenges in overgrazing and poverty by introducing market development using improved cattle and land privatization. They raised improved cattle that were western bred and were incapable of resisting drought and required special feeds. With pasture being collective in the country, utilized and owned by everyone, development workers fenced the communal lands to prevent the people from accessing the field for their cattle. The Aboriginals, therefore, became isolated from agricultural development. Further, the development project did not include locally bred cattle, which were declared a success in the drought region. In the case of Mexico, export has constantly been falling and is attributed to the government’s involvement in the trade. With trade policies that subject barriers to Mexican business, imports from America forced millions of smallholders off their farms and into industrial or service-based jobs. Therefore, despite being part of the NAFTA and WTO, Mexico relied on the US, which exported four-fifths of its products but imported two- and one-half to Mexico.