Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-02T19:49:29.737Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Dysrhythmic Process of Political Change

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 July 2011

C. S. Whitaker JR.
Get access

Extract

With several notable and recent exceptions, the current literature on “modernization” in “developing countries” implicitly or explicitly assumes an inherent irreconcilability between “modern” and “traditional” values, institutions, and behavior patterns. Related to this assumption is the expectation that whenever important elements off these two social systems collide, the natural result is social convulsion.

It is typical of this literature to qualify these assumptions with the caveat, commonly employed in conjunction with the use of “ideal j types,” that differences between these two apparent classes of society are only relative, or that “pure” cases of either type are never manifested.

Type
Research Article
Information
World Politics , Volume 19 , Issue 2 , January 1967 , pp. 190 - 217
Copyright
Copyright © Trustees of Princeton University 1967

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 It is obvious that modifiers which indicate relative contrasts of the so-called mini-max variety must imply mutual exclusivity no less than absolute differences. Thus, if the proposition is that a given social quality necessarily conflicts with another to any degree, then maximization of both qualities in the same context is precluded. To that extent, in other words, they are mutually exclusive. Statements in connection with the use of the supposedly heuristic concepts “traditional” and “modern” typically suggest that “most people” in the one type of society behave one way with respect to certain values or activities, or that each type of society behaves as a whole in a certain way in “most instances.” Indeed to claim that qualities associated with the terms “traditional” and “modern” do not diverge significantly would be to nullify the supposed significance of the terms, namely, that they identify distinguishable classes of societies.

Concerning the logical status of the Weberian “ideal-type” formulations and similar constructs, the philosopher of science C. G. Hempel demonstrated some time ago that any distinction between this sort of mental operation and a hypothesis in the strict sense is simply spurious. See American Philosophical Association (Eastern Division), Science, Language and Human Rights; Symposium: Problems of Concept and Theory Formulation in the Social Sciences (Philadelphia 1952), 71–134.Google Scholar

2 It is important to note that the terms “eurhythmic” and “dysrhythmic” are not synonymous with “smooth” and “rough,” or “peaceful” and “violent.” In the present discussion, “eurhythmic” (consistent and supportive) change means further change toward the characteristics of the society from which the original change derived. Conceivably, both eurhythmic and dysrhythmic processes could be either smooth or rough, peaceful or violent. However, if a eurhythmic process involves the interaction of mutually exclusive qualities, then rough or violent change seems indicated. Thus it is that a combination of dichotomous and eurhythmic conceptualizations of phenomena of change have typically produced pathological characterizations of a supposed “transitional” or intermediate phase. Use of the very term “transitional” as a general category connotes unilinear direction, i.e., from one known type or class of society to another already defined one.

3 In Hoselitz, Bert F., ed., The Progress of Underdeveloped Areas (Chicago 1952), 113–25.Google Scholar

4 “Patterns (Structures) of Modernization and Political Development,” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 358 (March 1965), 29–40.CrossRefGoogle ScholarThe quotation is from p. 30; the emphasis is mine. Levy's views are most recently elaborated in his Modernization and the Structure of Societies, 2 vols. (Princeton 1966)Google Scholar.

5 Cf. Wittfogel, Karl A., Oriental Despotism (New Haven and London 1957), 420Google Scholar–21; and Hoffer, Eric, The Ordeal of Change (New York 1964), 25–26Google Scholar.

6 Max Millikan, F. and Blackmer, Donald L. M., The Emerging Nations (Boston 1961), 44Google Scholar.

7 Hagen, Everett E., On the Theory of Social Change (Homewood 1962), 26.Google Scholar

8 Riggs, Fred W., “Agraria and Industria,” in Siffin, W. J., ed., Toward the Comparative Study of Public Administration (Bloomington 1957), 103Google Scholar–4.

9 Administration in Developing Countries: The Theory of Prismatic Society (Boston ) 47Google Scholar

10 Etzioni, Amitai and Etzioni, Eva, Social Change (New York 1964), 403Google Scholar.

11 Levine, Donald N., “Ethiopia: Identity, Authority, and Realism,” in Pye, Lucian W. and Verba, Sidney, eds., Political Culture and Political Development (Princeton 1965), esp. 270Google Scholar–71. Levine's full-scale treatment of Ethiopia is Wax and Gold (Chicago 1965).Google ScholarFriedland, William H., “Some Sources of Traditionalism Among Modern African Elites,” reprinted in Hanna, William H., ed., Independent Black Africa: The Politics of Freedom (Chicago 1964), 363Google Scholar–69. LeVine, Robert A., “Political Socialization and Culture Change,” in Geertz, Clifford, ed., Old Societies and New States (Glencoe 1963), 280–303Google Scholar.

12 Lockwood, William W., “Economic and Political Modernization: Japan,” in Ward, Robert E. and Rustow, Dankwart A., eds., Political Modernization in Japan and Turner (Princeton 1964), 117Google Scholar–45. “Pp. 444–45. Moore, “Wilbert E., Social Change (Englewood Cliffs 1963), 67Google Scholar. LaPalombara, Joseph, ed., Bureaucracy and Political Development (Princeton 1963), 38–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar, emphasis mine.

13 Pye, Lucian W., Politics, Personality and Nation Building (New Haven and London 1962Google Scholar).

14 “The Concept of Political Development,” Annals of the American Academy oj Political and Social Science, 358 (March 1965), 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar Pye states, “The politics of historic empires, of tribe and ethnic community, or of colony must give way to the politics necessary to produce an effective nation-state which can operate successfully in a system of other nation-states” (p. 7). “Although to a limited extent the political sphere may be autonomous from the rest of society, for sustained political development to take place it can only be within the context of a multidimensional process of social change in which no segment or dimension of the society can long lag behind” (p. 11).

15 Whitaker, C. S. Jr., “The Politics of Tradition: A Study of Continuity and Change in Northern Nigeria,” unpubl. diss., Princeton, 1964Google Scholar.

16 Social Change, 75. See also Moore's The Impact of Industry (Englewood Cliffs I965).

17 Furnivall, J. S., “Some Problems of Tropical Economy,” in Hinden, Rita, ed., Fabian Colonial Essays (London 1945Google Scholar), and Colonial Policy and Practice (London 1948Google Scholar). Kuper, Leo, An African Bourgeoisie: Race, Class, and Politics in South Africa (New Haven 1965Google Scholar), and “Plural Societies-Perspectives and Problems” (forthcoming). M. G. Smith, who combines expertise in African and West Indian studies, has written a critical statement of his position on the premise of necessary societal consensus in the preface to his collection of essays The Plural Society in the British West Indies (Berkeley and Los Angeles 1965), vii-xvii. Also see his “Institutional and Political Conditions of Pluralism” and “Pluralism in Pre-Colonial African Societies” (forthcoming). Van den Berghe, Pierre L., Africa: Social Problems of Change and Conflict (San Francisco 1965Google Scholar), and “Pluralism and the Polity-A Theoretical Exploration” (forthcoming). These forthcoming papers will appear in a volume edited by Leo Kuper and Smith, M. G.; they were produced for die 1965–66 Colloquium in African Studies, University of California, Los AngelesGoogle Scholar.

18 Government in Zazzau (Oxford 1960Google Scholar).

19 See Smith, “Historical and Cultural Conditions of Political Corruption Among the Hausa,” Comparative Studies in Society and History, vi (1963–64), 164Google Scholar–94.

20 , Whitaker, “Three Perspectives on Hierarchy: Political Thought and Leadership in Northern Nigeria,” Journal of Commonwealth Political Studies, in (March 1965), 6Google Scholar.

21 Government in Zazzau, 106.

22 Report on the Exchange of Customary Gifts (Kaduna 1954), 6Google Scholar.

23 Northern Nigeria, Regional Council Debates, August 19, (Ka duna 1950Google Scholar).

24 Government in Zazzau, 8. Politics of Tradition,” 447.

25 Sec Sklar, R. L. and Whitaker, C. S. Jr., “The Federal Republic of Nigeria,” in Carter, Gwendolen M., ed., National Unity and Regionalism in Eight African States (Ithaca 1966), 59Google Scholar.

26 Lloyd, P. C., “Traditional Rulers,” in Coleman, James S. and Rosberg, Carl G. Jr., eds., Political Parties and National Integration in Tropical Africa (Berkeley and Los Angeles 1964), 400.Google Scholar

27 Sklar, R. L. and Whitaker, C. S. Jr., “Nigeria,” in Coleman and Rosberg, 609Google Scholar.

28 Smith, Government in Zazzau, 250.

29 Daily Times of Nigeria, September 3, 1959, 3.

30 Northern Nigeria, Ministry of Trade and Industries, The Industrial Potentialities of Northern Nigeria (Kaduna 1963), 13Google Scholar, 16.

31 Ibid., 30; also seeProvincial Annual Reports (Kaduna 1953–1964Google Scholar), passim.

32 “Whitaker, “The Politics of Tradition,” 408.

33 Levy, cited n. 4.