Modernization

Modernization has many dimensions. It may be perceived at society level, group level, or individual level. It may also be perceived as economic modernization, political modernization, social modernization, technological modernization, military modernization, police modernization, educational modernization, administrative modernization, and so forth. The concept has thus been employed in a diffused manner.

The Concept

Modernization is a process of change (Gore, 1982: 7). Earlier, the term ‘modernization’ was used to refer only to “change in economy and its related effect on social values and social practices”. It was described as a process
that changed the society from primarily agricultural to primarily industrial economy. As a consequence of this change in economy, the society simultaneously underwent changes in values, beliefs and norms (Gore, Ibid: 7). Today, the term ‘modernization’ is given a broader meaning. It is described as “social change involving the elements of science and technology.” It involves change based on rationality.

According to Alatas (1972: 22), modernization is a process by which modern scientific knowledge is introduced in the society with the ultimate purpose of achieving a better and more satisfactory life in the broadest sense of the term, as accepted by the society concerned.

The changes that occur with the transition from a traditional to a modern society, according to James O’ Conell (1965: 549) are:

• Economic growth increases and it becomes self-sustaining.
• Occupations become more skilled and specialized.
• Number of people engaged in primary occupations reduces while that of people engaged in secondary and tertiary occupations increases.
• Age-old agricultural implements and methods give way to use of tractors, fertilizers, etc.
• Barter system is replaced by the money system.
• An interdependence comes into being between communities that previously were separated from and independent of one another.
• The process of urbanization increases.
• Ascriptive status gives way to achieved status.
• Equality gradually replaces hierarchy.
• With better medical care and improved health, the longevity of life or survival rate increases.
• Geographical distances are shortened with the use of new methods of transport and communication.
• Hereditary leadership gives way to elected leadership.

The Characteristics

Moore (1961: 57-82) has suggested that a modern society has specific economic, political and cultural characterstics.

In the economic sphere, a modern society is characterized by:

• (a) the development of a very high level of technology, fostered by the systematic application of knowledge, the pursuit of which became the province of the secondary (industrial, commercial) and tertiary (service) occupations, as against the primary (agricultural) ones;
• (b) growing specialization of economic roles; and
• (c) the growth of the scope and complexity of the major markets, the markets for goods, labour, and money. In the political sphere, a modern society is in some sense democratic or at least pcpulistic. It is characterized by: (a) the decline of traditional legitimation of the rulers with reference to powers outside their own society; (b) the establishment of some sort of ideological accountability of the rulers to the ruled, who are alleged to be the holders of the potential political power; (c) growing extension of the territorial scope of power of the central, legal, administrative and political agencies of the society; (d) continual spread of potential power to wider groups in the society-ultimately to all adult citizens and to moral orders; and (e) total disappearance on weakening of ascriptive political commitment to any given ruler or group.

In the cultural sphere, a modern society is characterized by:

• (a) a growing differentiation of the major elements of the major cultural and value systems, that is, religion, philosophy and science;
• (b) the spread of literacy and secular education;
• (c) a more complex institutional system for the advancement of specialized roles based on intellectual disciplines;
• (d) expansion of the media of communication; and
• (e) development of a new cultural outlook, characterized by an emphasis on progress and improvement, on happiness and expression of abilities, on individuality as a moral value and stress on dignity of the individual and on efficiency.

Broadly speaking, modernization has following important characteristics:

• a temper of science
• reason and rationalism
• secularism
• high aspirations and achievement orientation
• overall transformation of attitudes, norms and values
• creation of new functional institutions
• investment in human resources
• a growth-oriented economy
• a national interest rather than kin, caste, religion, region or language-oriented interests
• an open society
• a mobile personality

Prerequisites of Modernization

Before the transition from traditionalism to modernization is made, certain prerequisites of social change and modernization must be present in the society. These are: (i) an awareness of purpose and an eye on the future; (ii) an awareness of existence, beyond one’s own world, of many other societies; (iii) a sense of urgency; (iv) availability of variety of opportunities and roles; (v) an emotional preparedness for self-imposed tasks and sacrifices; and (vi) emergence of devoted, dynamic and committed leadership (Narmadeshwar Prasad, 1970: 19).

Modernization is critical because it requires not only a relatively stable new structure but one capable of adopting to continuously changing conditions and problems. Its success depends on the society’s capacity for internal transformation. Eisenstadt (1965: 659) has maintained that modernization requires three structural characteristics of a society: (i) (a high level of) structural differentiation, (ii) (a high level of) social mobilization, and (iii) a relatively centralized and autonomous institutional framework. All societies do not accept the process of modernization uniformly.

Following Herbert Blumer (1964:129), five different ways may be pointed out in which a traditional society can respond to the process of modernization. These are:

1. Rejective Response
A traditional society may reject modernization. This may occur at different points in different ways. Powerful groups, landed aristocracy, a government oligarchy, a union of workers, and religious fanatics may discourage modernization to protect their vested interests. Social prejudices, special interests and firm attachment to given forms of traditional life, beliefs and customs may lead certain sets of people to reject the process of modernization and maintain the traditional order.

2. Disjunctive Response
This response of conjunction between the old and the new or the co-existence of traditionalism and modernity occurs when the modernization process operates as a detached development, without affecting much the traditional life. In this way, there is no conflict between modernization and the traditional order, because the older system is not threatened. Features of modernization exist alongside with the traditional life.

3. Assimilative Response
This response consists of an absorption of the modernization process by the traditional order without disruption of its own organization and pattern of life. The example is the acceptance of the computer ideology by the employees in the banking system, or use of fertilizers and tractors by the peasants in the villages. In both cases, the modernization process comes to be woven into the traditional order without endangering or affecting the basic characteristics of the traditional order.

4. Supportive Response
This response takes the form of accepting the new and modern things because they strengthen or reinforce the traditional order. For example, accepting the modernization process in the police or military systems because it increases the efficiency of the police or the power of the military. Different traditional groups and institutions use the opportunity presented by modernization to pursue more effectively traditional interests and to maintain traditional positions more firmly. Modernization may provide resources and facilities to further traditional interest.

5. Disruptive Response
In this response, the traditional order is undermined at many points by the adjustments which are made to the situation introduced by modernization. Usually, all five of these responses take place at different points of the traditional order and in different combinations. The responses are governed by preferences, interests, and values.

According to Myron Weiner (1966: 8), the main instruments which make modernization possible are:

1. Education
It inculcates a sense of national loyalty and creates skills and attitudes essential for technological innovation. Edward Shils has also emphasized on the role of education in the process of modernization. Arnold Anderson, however, maintains that formal education is not adequate for teaching skills. Sometimes, university education may be a waste, for it increases the number of students with degrees without an increase in the number of people with modern skills and attitudes.

2. Communication
The development of mass communications (including telephone, TV, radio, movies, etc.) is an important means of spreading modern ideas at a faster rate. The only danger is that if these are controlled by the government, they will spread only one type of ideological thought. In democracies, however, the press is often independent to express its views.

3. Ideology Based on Nationalism
The nationalistic ideologies serve as unifying influence in bridging social cleavages within plural societies. They also help the political elite in changing the behaviour of masses of people. Binder, however, has pointed out that the elite may have modern ideology but it is not necessary that it may facilitate development also.

4. Charismatic Leadership
A charismatic leader is in a better position to persuade people to adopt modern beliefs, practices and behaviour patterns because of the respect and loyalty he commands. The danger is that the charismatic leader might use the modern values and attitudes as an instrument for personal glorification rather than national development.

5. Coercive Governmental Authority
If the government authority is weak, it may not succeed in implementing the policies aimed at the modernization process, but if the government is strong, it may even adopt coercive measures to compel people to accept attitudes and behaviour patterns which aim at development. Myron Weiner is, however, of the opinion that nationalism, under the aegis of an authoritarian regime, may lead a country into suicidal expansion abroad rather than development at home. In this connection, it may not be wrong to cite the example of the policies of the Bush regime (in America) political elite pertaining to countries like Iraq etc. After Russia lost its supremacy, America’s governmental authority has started coercing the nations in the name of the process of modernizing the under-developed and the developing countries.

Myron Weiner (1966: 9-10) has also talked of opportunities and incentives along with value and attitude changes for the modernization of a society. Many economists have supported this viewpoint. They point to the existence of institutional impediments to productive activities that retard the rate of investment. A few examples of such institutional impediments are land tenure systems that deny peasants the gain from increasing productivity, taxes that slow the flow of goods from one part of the country to another, and an elaborate bureaucratic regulations. Impact of the West and Modernization in India The impact of the West on India, following Alatas (1972: 121), can be discussed in five phases. The first phase is that of hostile contact with the conquest of Alexander, etc., followed by contact of peaceful inter-change as the result of trade and commerce of successive centuries. The second phase began by the end of the fifteenth century when Vasco da Gama arrived with his ships at Calicut in 1498 A.D. Within a few years, the Portuguese occupied Goa. But the effect of these westerners was relatively restricted. The third phase began when East India Company established its rule in the beginning of the eighteenth century and later on the British rule was established in the country by the middle of the eighteenth century. This was the first step in the expansion of western culture in India. The fourth phase commenced with the beginning of the nineteenth century following the industrial revolution. With the economic exploitation of India by the British as source of raw materials, began the spread and dominance of western culture in social and cultural fields too. The fifth and the last phase began after the political independence of the country in 1947.

What has been the impact of the western culture on our society in terms of effect on our culture and our social systems? The impact may be briefly described as follows:

1. Western institutions like banking system, public administration, military organization, modern medicine, law, etc., were introduced in our country.
2. Western education broadened the outlook of the people who started talking of their rights and freedom. The introduction of the new values, the rational and secular spirit, and the ideologies of individualism, equality and justice assumed great importance.
3. Acceptance of scientific innovations raised the aspirations of raising the standard of living and providing material welfare for the people.
4. Many reform movements came into being. Several traditional beliefs and practices dysfunctional to society were discarded and many new behaviour patterns were imbibed.
5. Our technology, agriculture, entrepreneurship and industry were modernized leading to the economic well-being of our country.
6. The hierarchy of political values has been restructured. Accepting the democratic form of government, all native states who had been under a monarchic form of government have been merged into the Indian State and the authority and domination of feudals and zamindars has been demolished.
7. There have been structural changes in social institutions like marriage, family and caste, creating new forms of relations in social life, religion, etc.
8. The introduction of the modern means of communication, such as railway and bus travel, postal service, air and sea travel, press, and radio and television have affected man’s life in varied respects.
9. There is rise in the feeling of nationalism.
10. The emergence of the middle class has changed the dominant values of the society.

The impact of western culture has also been described by Alatas in terms of four types of changes in our culture and social system: eliminative changes, additive changes, supportive changes and synthetic changes. The eliminative changes are those which cause the disappearance of culture traits, behaviour patterns, values, beliefs, institutions, etc. As an illustration, we can cite the example of total change in weapons used in fighting wars, abolition of sati, and so forth. The additive changes refer to the adoption of new culture traits, institutions, behaviour patterns and belief systems covering diverse aspects of life. These additions were not present earlier in the culture of people. Introducing divorce in the Hindu society, giving share to daughters in father’s property, introducing election system in panchayats, etc. are a few examples of this type of change. The supportive changes are those which strengthen the values, beliefs or behaviour patterns present in society before contact with the West. A simple example of this change is the use of’ Hundi’ system in loan transactions. The synthetic changes result in the creation of new forms from existing elements plus adopted ones. The most simple instance is the creation of residentially nuclear but functionally joint family which continues to fulfil social obligations to parents and siblings. Continuing dowry system but putting restrictions on amount to be given or taken, and associating children along with parents in mate selection are two other examples of synthetic change. This categorization of changes due to western impact is only for the analytical purposes. In practice, it is not possible to isolate them from each other. Within one type of change, we may find elements of other types of changes too. For example, the introduction of the textile industry contains the supportive element in the sense that it facilitates the production of cloth. But at the same time, since it pushed back the traditional handloom and weaving industry, it may be said to have the element of eliminative change. Opening of the wall-less prisons in the prison system is another example of change having elements of three different types. So are the changes in the education system, banking system, family system, marriage system, and so forth.

The main question now is: Where has India reached after contact with the West? Has India progressed? Has it contributed to the welfare of the people? Is it possible to answer this question objectively? Can subjectivism and philosophical partiality be avoided in such analysis? Some intellectuals feel that India faced number of problems at the end of the Second World War, like the problems of economic backwardness and a large number of people living below the poverty line, unemployment, predominance of religion in all walks of life, rural indebtedness, caste conflicts, communal disharmony, shortage of capital, lack of trained personnel with technical skills, imperfect means for mobilizing human and material resources, and so forth. The western impact has provided alternative solutions to handle these problems. But other scholars hold that western impact has not helped India much in facing the problems. If some problems have been solved, many new have been created. And India is not trying to meet them through western models. It is using its indigenous elements in its approach.
It was only after the independence of the country that there was a rise in industrial development, dissemination of education, rural development, control over population, and so forth. It was thus independence from western rule rather than contact with the West that made modernization possible. The fact is that in certain areas of life, we may be justified in acclaiming the positive impact of the West. Modern medical science, modern technology, modern methods of combating natural catostropoies, modern methods of providing security from external dangers to the country, etc. will go down in Indian history as the incontestable contributions of the West. But India is using at the same time its traditional institutions, beliefs and practices for the uplift of the masses. Thus, even after the impact of the West, and after the modernization of various systems, India will remain India. Indian culture will subsist and survive in decades to come.

Process of Modernization in India

The analysis in the preceeding pages indicates that tradition and modernity constitute a continuum with tradition at one end and modernization at the other. Any society can be placed at any point on the continuum line. Most societies are in some form of transition. Indian society at the time of independence had deep-rooted traditions but it also wanted to become modern. There were people as well as leaders who wanted a traditional way of life; there were others who wanted to see India emerge as a modern state having no truck with the past. There were yet others who were for some kind of compromise or synthesis between tradition and modernity. They said that a traditional system can accept and absorb modernization up to a certain point. In the same way, a modernized system can tolerate traditional views up to a certain degree. They, thus, wanted co-existence. But the propounders of the first two schools maintained that the co-existence cannot last long. A point is soon reached when the traditional ethos become irreconcilable. What process of change did we ultimately adopt? We decided to modernize our society at various levels. What aspects of life were sought to be modernized and in what manner? At the social level, we wanted social relations to be based on concepts like equality and human dignity, and social values which would ensure social mobility, removal of caste disabilities, amelioration of the condition of women, and so forth.

At the economic level, we wanted technological growth and distributive justice. At the cultural level, we wanted secularism, rationalism, and liberalism. At the political level, we desired representative government, democratic institutions, achievement-oriented power structure, and a greater voice and participation for Indians in the governance of the country.

The means or agents selected for modernizing the society (based on rationality and scientific knowledge) were: planning, education (which may dispel the darkness of ignorance), legislation, assistance from foreign countries, adopting policy of liberalization, and the like. As regards the processes of modernization, broadly speaking, it may be said that from the qualitative point of view, modernization in India is undergoing the following processes:

• At the economic structural level, there is a persistent and growing tendency to adopt the rational, mechanized industrial economy in place of older communal-familistictool economy. This is even responsible for the breakdown of traditional systems like jajmani system.
• At the political structural level, the change in the power structure is being introduced through the abolition of semi-feudal group-oriented power structure of the past and by replacing it by a rational parliamentary democratic structure of power which is essentially individual-oriented.
• At the cultural level, the change in the realm of values is from sacred value system to secular value system.
• at the social structural level, there is a decline in the traditional principle of ascribed status and role to achieved status and role.

Yogendra Singh (1973: x) is of the opinion that a unique feature of modernization in India is that it is being carried forward through adaptive changes in the traditional structures rather than structural dissociation or breakdown. While it is true that most features of the traditional society cannot fit in with the modern society, modernity cannot be imposed upon the population. Modernization has to be professionally directed. The good features of traditional institutions can be retained by suitable adjustments in the process of development. A society is tension-free only when it is a closed and an immobile society. A developing society functions on the basis of built-in resistances and tensions. Tensions exist because of an inherent clash between tradition and modernity. Quite often, tensions are the legacies of the past, accentuated by economic development. Often in the process of development, some of the tensions are resolved. There is a dichotomous relationship between the forces of stability and conservation and the forces of change and modernization. A developing society faces these problems rather acutely. Challenges to change and modernization like regionalism, parochialism, illiteracy, migration, inflation, lack of capital, adjustment with neighbouring nations for reducing expenses on defence, political corruption, bureaucratic inefficiency and non-commitment, etc. have therefore to be faced patiently and methodically through rational adoptive proceses. The break-up of a traditional society implies greater individual freedom, horizontalization of authority, more association of masses with decision-making, etc. The process of modernization involves clearing away social structure ‘resistances’. Simultaneously, planning development at all lovels—economic, social, political and cultural— alone will provide incentive to people to accept and share attitudes and norms of modernity and compel key social groups—the intelligentsia, political elite, bureaucrats and technicians—to accept the challenges of planned change.

Problems of Modernization

Following are some of the problems of modernization:

• 1. The first paradox of modernization is that a modern society must change in all ways at once but such a regular, co-ordinated pattern of growth cannot be conceivably planned. A certain amount of social unrest is therefore inevitably created. For example, mass educational system demands that trained individuals must be absorbed in occupational roles commensurate with their training and knowledge. But it is not always possible to provide jobs to all the educated people. This leads to unrest among the educated unemployed.
• 2. The second problem is that structural change is uneven during periods of modernization. For instance, industries may be modernized but family system, religious system, etc. remain conservative. These discontinuties and patterns of change affect the established social and other structures and produce lags and bottlenecks. Another example of this in India is that decreasing the age of voting from twenty-one to eighteen years might have been a step of entering into the modern era but it has created a crisis since a mass electroate rests on the assumption of a mature and literate electorate with a sense of citizenship and an ability to participate in the policy.
• 3. The third problem is that modernization of social and economic institutions creates conflicts with the traditional ways of life. For example, the trained doctors pose a threat to traditional medicine men. Similarly, the items produced by machinery deprive the domestic workers of their means of livelihood. At the same time, many people in the society with traditional and conservative values and attitudes become hostile to people who accept modern way of life. Thus, the conflict between the traditional and modern ways becomes a source of unrest.
• 4. The fourth problem is that most often roles adopted by the people are modern but values continue to be traditional. For example, even after taking training in medicine and surgery, a doctor tells his patient, “I treat, He cures”. This indicates that he has no confidence in himself to diagnose the disease properly. But instead of blaming himself, he blames the way he is socialized to develop values in life.
• 5. The fifth problem is that there is lack of co-operation among agencies which modernize, and among institutions and systems which are modernized. This many-a-time leads to cultural lag as well as institutional conflicts.
• 6. The last problem is that modernization raises the aspirations of people but social systems fail to provide opportunities to them to achieve their aspirations. This creates frustrations, deprivations and social unrest.

Modernization of Man

Modernization aims at achieving a decent standard of living for all people in the society. It also encompasses the idea of economic, social, political and cultural maturation. More than this, it requires the very transformation of the nature of man—a transformation which according to Alex Inkeles (1966: 158) is not a means to an end but the end itself of the development process. But who is a modern man? How to identify him? A modern man is one who gives up the traditional ways of thinking and feeling, who has an open mind to accept new ideas, who is rational and secular, and who believes in equality, freedom and justice.

Referring to the external characteristics of a modern man as distinct from the internal characteristics, Alex Inkeles holds that a modern man is less likely to work as a farmer and is more likely to seek employment in a large and complex productive enterprise based on the intensive use of power and advanced technologies or in a big private or public concern which may give him a higher position and status in the society. He may prefer to live in a city where he may have access to all possible resources in a neighbourhood which may provide him transport, shopping, children’s school, medical and postal etc. facilities within his reach, and in a house offering him some modern material comforts. He may prefer to become a member of clubs and organizations which provide him opportunities for expression, recognition and mobility. Being more exposed to mass communication, he may take interest in politics and in social development. Instead of living in a network of primary kin ties, he may prefer to be drawn into a much more impersonal milieu where he may come into contact with persons who may render him professional and other services and aid in times of distress. All these attributes in themselves do not constitute modernity but they are the attributes of man’s life space that may impinge on the modern man. Although, man’s exposure to modern setting may certainly contribute to the transformation of a traditional man, and although that setting may in turn require new values and behaviour patterns from him, but the internal characteristics of a modern man—his ways of thinking, feeling and acting— are more important to consider him truly modern. What are these internal traits of a modern man?

Alex Inkeles (Ibid: 161-165) has identified some of these traits:

• (1) He should be ready for new experience and should be open to innovation and change.
• (2) He should Have a disposition to form or hold opinions over a large number of the problems and issues that arise not only in his immediate environment but also outside it. The more educated the individual, the greater is the readiness to offer opinions in response to this challenge. Contrary to this, a traditional man takes no interest in issues that surround and touch him. Even if he has an opinion, he feels shy of expressing it. The modern man shows more awareness of the diversity of opinions and attitudes.
• (3) A modern man is oriented more to the present and the future than to the past. He is also more regular, orderly and systematic in organizing his affairs.
• (4) A modern man is more oriented to planning and believes in it as a way of handling life.
• (5) A modern man believes in efficacy and is open to learning so that he can dominate the environment in order to advance his own purposes and
  goals, rather than being dominated entirely by that environment.
• (6) A modern man is great calculator and believes in a reasonably lawful world under human control.
• (7) A modern man shows more respect and dignity in his dealings with others.
• (8) A modern man has more faith in science and technology.
• (9) A modern man believes in democracy and distributive justice.
  

This list of attributes of a modern man could be extended but it is sufficient enough to serve the idea how modernization may be perceived at an individual level besides perceiving it at group and society levels.