2 - The Myth of Modernisation?

Summary

In the first chapter, I suggested a framework that divided social change into two forms. The first, rather dramatic change is often the outcome of unexpected, sudden events, such as wars and large-scale natural disasters, or results from the direct imposition of new legal frameworks. More gradual change occurs primarily through shifts in societal values and beliefs and is often linked to industrial development or to other changes in mass economics. One of the most discussed – and controversial – of these latter shifts is the process of modernisation, a concept often linked to “Westernisation,” “globalisation,” and “individualisation” (Goodwin, 1999; Segall et al., 1990).

Ideas about modernisation – and its impact on personal relationships – date back at least a century. Tönnies ([1887]; 1957) described the societal shift from Gesellschaft (small-scale neighbourhood communities) to larger and more competitive Gemeinschaft. According to Giddens, sociology itself can be defined as “the reflexive analysis of modernity” (Giddens & Pierson, 1998, p. 69). Giddens and Pierson (1998) characterise modernity as a set of attitudes that views the world as open to human intervention, as well as a group of economic institutions and other practices (such as mass democracy). A number of definitions cite the influence of a dominant culture on another as key to modernisation, with the traditional society often forced to borrow customs and behaviours from the other (Divale & Seda, 2001). From this perspective, modernised societies are more complex than their more traditional counterparts.