HIS6/6: The New States: Modernization and Internal Problems: Creation of national unity and ideology

The New States: Modernization and Internal Problems

Creation of national unity and ideology

Modernization, in sociology, the transformation from a traditional, rural, agrarian society to a secular, urban, industrial society.

The period following the Second World War has witnessed the advent of a massive and unprecedented project of social engineering in Third World countries, variously termed industrialization, modernization, or development-*-; and justified on the basis of a supposed superiority of Western economic and political institutions and (initially at least) of Western values over non-Western ones. While the philosophical roots of the belief in the superiority of Western values can be traced back to the Enlightenment ethic of ‘the rational pursuit of human freedoms’, and the Colonial ethic of ‘the White

Man’s burden’, contemporary writers generally legitimate their actions on relatively partial (and
therefore more defensible) grounds, namely the need for and the desirability of transferring modern Western technology to Third World countries in order to bring about increases in per capita output (particularly in the high-productivity industrial sector), or the expanded provision of “basic needs” (i.e., formal education, modern health facilities, piped water supply, and so forth). Such transfer is argued to be speeded up by other forms of an institutional and structural change such as “state-building” (i.e., the expansion of State power conjointly with the introduction of parliamentary and democratic institutions), and the inculcation of a particular set of development-enhancing “modern” (i.e., of course, “Western”) values and habits among the people of traditional societies.

The early days of this project were characterized by unalloyed confidence in the ability of social scientists to help the people of Third World countries banish their inherited problems and construct a new social reality from scratch-. Of course, even in that age of unbounded optimism there were several voices of doubt and dissent regarding the sagacity, desirability or feasibility of such a gigantic endeavor; but the self-assurance of the theorists was so unequivocal and belief in their nostrums so widespread that doubters could readily be dismissed as irrational and misguided ‘cranks’ if not as malicious mischiefmakers.

Accusations of failures could similarly be disregarded as resulting from weaknesses not in the theory but in the application, because of the endurance of backward behavior, values and institutions in the countries concerned, or (at a later stage) from the inefficiency or veniality of politicians and bureaucrats. Matters have changed, however. Although it may be too early to begin writing an epitaph for development theory, it is certainly not inopportune to record the passing of the era of blind faith today there is a crisis in modernisation theory.

Hardly a book or journal on development issues comes out which does not express disappointment, disillusionment or dissatisfaction with the ability of what Ashis Nandy has called a ‘secular theory of salvation,’ to live up to its promise to expand human freedoms Many factors have contributed to this emerging crisis. The most obvious one is the extremely uneven record of development: of the persistence of poverty amid increasing affluence, of the increase in unemployment despite expanding production, and, in general, of the failure in ameliorating the condition of people in the
poorest countries of Africa and Asia. A second reason is the increasing association of modernization and
development with ecological disasters: the devastation of tropical rain-forests and mountain watersheds, the deleterious (and unanticipated) ecological consequences of large dams and large irrigation systems, the loss of subsistence agricultural land to desertification in Africa and waterlogging and salinity in Asia, and the high energy-requirement and vulnerability of modern technologies.

Another contributory factor is a similarly increasing association of development with higher levels of conflicts and tensions in much of the Third World, in almost all parts where the developmental project has been underway for a significant period of time, where such conflicts as wars, civil unrest, civic and ethnic violence, political repression and urban crime appear to have increased tremendously Responsibility must also be placed at the door of a fourth consideration namely the onset of a period of confusion, muddled groping and search for new paradigms in Economics as well as Political Science, the two mother disciplines of development theory

Notwithstanding the importance of each of the above, however, it seems that the single most important reason for the spreading disillusionment is a ‘loss of hope’ as Mary Kaldor once put it, an erosion of the myth that development can create a just and humane society. This erosion has also permitted the increase in popularity and self-assurance of non-Western (and often anti-Western) social, cultural and political movements in Third World countries. Some of the above reasons can be summarized here.

1) First, there is growing recognition that it is not possible, given the earth’s resources, for the entire planet to be able to emulate the consumption pattern of Western countries.

2) Second, tremendous unanticipated social and political problems accompanying development
have raised the concern that, even if it were possible to ‘become like the West,’ attempts to do so in the shortest possible time could be socially harmful.

3) Third, growing familiarity of Third World citizens with the mode of existence in the West has created serious reservations about the desirability of following this line of development. These reservations have surfaced in the West as well, and have no doubt helped to re-inforce those in the Third World.

4) Fourth, this process of doubt and discovery has been hastened by the events of the seventies
(Watergate, Vietnam, OPEC, economic crises, the decay of cities, and the plight of elderly or minorities in Western countries), which led to the gradual erosion of the myth that people in Western societies were in greater control of their destiny.

5) Fifth, a similar disillusionment seems to have set in with regard to the Soviet model, with the publicisation of the Stalinist purges, expansion of State control over peoples’ lives, and a generalised denial of freedoms.

6) Sixth, escalation of the irrational arms race between the two superpowers and the accompanying intensification of belligerent rhetoric, despite widespread popular resistance, have created doubts about the ability of the rational model to even ensure the survival of the species.