Modernization Theory - Essay Example

Modernization Theory Introduction Development remains a critical subject of discussion. The term development in this context carries the meaning of the social condition across the globe. It describes the authentic needs of the populations and the rational and sustainability of use of the resources and systems in satisfying those needs. Therefore, the processes of the modernization theory describe the appearances of these models of social organization as they emerged in Europe in the seventeenth century and subsequently spread worldwide to influence the social changes in the regions applied (Inglehart & Christian 27). Modernization theorists thus sought to explain the essence of these developments and the changing ways of the society from traditional to modern states. Thus, in evaluating the modernization theories, it is essential to reflect rationally on the discrepancies that befall the theory and its assumptions. However, my stance to this reflection is that the modernization theory as it explains the processes of development; it does not successfully present a clear understanding of progress in the civilization. Assumptions of modernization theorists and Core areas of agreement and disagreement Modernization theory states that it is progressive processes whose descending in the society is inevitable. Additionally, the argument follows that the modernization theory as occurs is a desirable development, which entailed the processes facilitating development in the regions where it occurred. According to the theorists, the processes of the modernization theory constitute three varied waves of occurrence. The first wave of the procedural development occurred in the early 20th century. The core happening was the attempt to diffuse the western culture, their technological innovations and the individualized communication styles as superior (Billet 36). The suggested developments were highly selective and addressed the factors of materialism and superiority innovations. This wave of the modernization theory followed the assumptions that with respect to economic development, mass media is the channel to promote the global diffusion of the technical and social innovations essential to the modernization of those societies. Another variant produced in this wave focused on literacy and culture development. It stated that the communication would facilitate literacy and additional skills and techniques that encourage the state of mind towards favourable modernity (Inglehart & Christian 65). This variant encouraged the thinking that an imagination is the alternative of life beyond the traditional ways. Lastly, this wave embodied the need to establish national identity development. Its support would eventually lead to the birth of the new nations that came as colonies and eventually support the establishment of democratic policies (Billet 48). These conventional theories; however face discrediting arguments in that they highly depict a pro-western bias. Those opposed to these developments of the modernization theory oppose the same from its aspects of focusing on the western considerations as the superior and civilized developments (Gilman 41). Thus, the biased aspect of the waves of modernization theory and the developments as they followed constitutes the core areas of disagreement. The successive wave of the modernization theory followed from 1950s to 1980s (Billet 49). This wave of the modernization theory did not support the developments and propositions embodied in the western modernization processes. On the contrary, the core arguments of this wave of the modernization process held that the case of western cultural and economic imperialism created aspects of dependency (Scott 43). Thus, this wave of the modernization process led to the birth of the dependency theory. The dependency aspect factored in that the propositions as developed in the modernization process would lead to overdependence on the part of the recipients of the processes of the development. The final wave of the modernization theory started rising from the 1990s and reflected the high or post-modernity considerations. This development possesses a rather impartial approach to the modernization process, viewing the western modernization from the varied perspectives (Gilman 56). The approach in this wave of the modernization processes focuses on unearthing the contradictions within the processes of modernization and explains the consequences of the modernity for the individuals within the contemporary societies. In characterizing the society, the theorists focus on defining the society as containing the time-space instantiation, as well as, dissembling mechanisms (Inglehart 38). The traditional society as existed based on the need for the direct interactions among the people as they live close to each other. The modern stretch creates cross-spaced and timing aspects as key determinants in understanding the processes of development. The dissembling aspects of the development as the modernization theory proceeds entail the symbolic means such as language and money. These abstract developments of the society entailed the theme of unification and fragmentation of the society towards the processes of development (Inglehart 44). The scale of the extensions in unity and fragmentation of the world finally settled into the social and individualized affiliations to the development process; hence, influencing the development processes. The modernization process is progressive as the theorists present the occurrences of the systems into higher capacity of functionality, participation and distribution of the systems. Additionally, modernization is a lengthy process entailing an evolutionary approach to change rather than being revolutionary (So 41). The core assumptions as made of the modernization theory that entail the following definitions. The first assumption is that modernization is a systemic process. This assumption implies that modernity has the attribute of being a consistent whole, appearing as a cluster rather than as isolation. This assumption is key to understanding the procedural evolution of the modernization processes, confirming that the process of modernization is progressive (Billet 62). The second key assumption as the theorists define is that it is a transformative process. In essence, this assumption of the process of modernization implies that in order to have a new system, the old system must seize to exist (Gilman 78). This means that modernization theorists assumed that the process of modernization removes the traditional structures and replaces them accordingly with a set of modern values. The third core assumption of the modernization theorists entails that modernization is an imminent process whose occurrence must occur. Notably, this assumption borrows from the first two assumptions, combining the belief that systematic and transformative cultures build the social system changes. This implies that the occurrence of modernization theory is a process whose control the society has little implication on its happening. Critiques of modernization theory: Samuel Huntington and Dependency theorists The strength in agreeing to these assumptions of the modernization processes include that it is possible to establish the basis of their focus. The establishment reflects in the vast application of the modernization theory in various continuums, including the economic, political and religious systems, as they exist (Inglehart 72). The role of the modernization theories in the society is evident from observing the happenings in the society, for instance, the economic developments and their spread through the relations created among the unified world. The underdevelopment in the fragmented worlds is due to their isolation from the consistently developing growing nations (So 52). For instance, in comparing the development frameworks of the western countries as compared to African countries. It is notable that the western countries adopt the assumptions of the modernization theory accordingly, leading to their unification; hence, their success in economic development compared to the isolated African continent (Billet 88). A second critique that depicts the modernization perspective is the analytical framework that it presents. Notably, this is the assumption the theorists borrow from observing the Third World countries as traditional while the Western countries are modern. Therefore, for the underdeveloped countries to progress, they ought to adopt the Western values (So 58). The modernization process from this process features the differentiation of the unstable democracies, dictatorships and stable dictatorships. The third critique in the modernization theory proceeds from the argument on the need to eliminate traditional values. In observing the modernization theory on its reference to development, this focuses on the homogenous set of the traditional values, in addition to the heterogeneous value of the systems possessed in the Third World countries (Inglehart & Christian 85). In this consideration, this critique also reflects that the traditional and modern values do not have a mutually exclusive relation. This critique implies that, some countries, despite having remarkably increased advancements in economic development, they continue to operate using their traditional systems. An illustration of such countries includes China and Japan, which rely on their traditional systems to facilitate their modernized development procedures in economy and other continuums (Inglehart & Christian 96). Therefore, from this perspective, the argument follows that the assumptions created of the modernization theory are not holding for all scenarios. Among the critics of the modernization, theory features the arguments as propelled from Samuel Huntington. In his approach to the assumptions as progressed in the other discussions, Huntington focused on the relativity of the theory towards the unproblematic picture of the social changes (Huntington 22). In his response, Huntington argued that the theorists of modernization were correct in seeing that the economic developments unleashed a profound understanding of social change. However, he also observed that the theorists were wrong in making the assumptions that the changes should occur as benign and progressive (Huntington 31). In his definition of the occurrence of the change, Huntington notes that the processes of the dramatic transformation as the change occurs tend to have unstable and violent characteristics. He also argues that in the course of the developments as proposed from the theorists perspectives the outcomes only occur positive only when there are existing healthy political institutions that have the ability to channel and respond to the changes (Huntington 67). Additionally, he also adds that the process of establishing such institutions for managing the process of modernization change is difficult and time consuming; hence, critics the modernization theory accordingly. Similarly, the dependency theorists also critique the thought of the modernization theory accordingly. The dependency line of thought emerged from Latin America following the social scientists such as Raul Prebisch, Celso Furtado and Thotonio Dos Santos (Apter 13). In an argument, the dependency theory holds that to understand the persistent global poverty and underdevelopment, it is essential to refer to the world economic systems (Apter 19). In defining the same, the theorists in this thought hold that underdevelopment is not a condition, rather, an active process occurring linking impoverishment to development. Thus, they imply that some worlds are underdeveloped because others are developed. In this approach, they argue that the developed countries, whose modernization process has several advancements, continue to progress economically at the expense of the underdeveloped worlds (Billet 102). Thus, they link that exploitation of various regions for resources such as labour and natural resources leads to dependency of those regions on the worlds that exploit their resources. The dependency theory links the argument to the process of colonization, arguing that modernization theory makes assumptions whose meaning is opposite of the actual effect on the ground. Thus, the dependency theory disagrees strongly with the modernization theory, as they envision the modernization process as the start of the processes of underdevelopment in the region of exploitation (Billet 106). Thus, from this perspective, the dependency theory argues that capitalism is the ruin of the Third World, unlike the modernization theory, which envisions capitalism as the creative force responsible for facilitating growth and progress. Weaknesses of the various perspectives In observing the various perspectives, the offshoot of the theories creates an interlocking and ultimately partial approach to explaining social change and development. The perspectives have weakness in that, they each focus on establishing differential patterns that result in different explanations of the occurrences of the society, as it exists (Scott 87). The consideration indicates that the world as a unified unit has entanglement estranged in theories that figuratively dissect the world from different planes to create an intricate pattern of evaluating the process of development and changes occurring. This opposing approach to the evaluation of theories explaining the patterns of the world create a complex reality of the various arguments (Billet 118). The descending observation of the various theories is that they all rely on the dogma of linear progress to explain their assumptions. This causes the cracks for criticisms as the developments and process of modernization have several inconsistencies whose differentiation is not explained in the various theories (Huntington 76). These inconsistencies in the theories and the increasingly opposing ideas established among the theories create constitute the observation of the weaknesses in the various perspectives. Works cited Apter, David E. Rethinking Development: Modernization, Dependency, and Postmodern Politics. Newbury Park u.a: Sage Publ, 2007. Print. Billet, Bret L. Modernization Theory and Economic Development: Discontent in the Developing World. Westport, Conn. u.a: Praeger, 2013. Print. Gilman, Nils. Mandarins of the Future: Modernization Theory in Cold War America. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2007. Print. Gilman, Nils. Modernization Theory: Its Origins and Rise in Cold War America. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2013. Print. Huntington, Samuel P. Political Order in Changing Societies. New Haven, Conn. ;London: Yale Univ. Press, 2006. Print. Inglehart, Ronald. Modernization and Post modernization: Cultural, Economic, and Political Change in 43 Societies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press, 2009. Print. Inglehart, Ronald, and Christian Welzel. Modernization, Cultural Change, and Democracy: The Human Development Sequence. Cambridge [etc.: Cambridge University Press, 2008. Print. Scott, Catherine V. Gender and Development: Rethinking Modernization and Dependency Theory. Boulder: L. Rienner Publishers, 2009. Print. So, Alvin Y. Social Change and Development: Modernization, Dependency, and World-Systems Theories. Newbury Park, Calif: Sage Publications, 2010. Print. Read More