Limitations of Modernisation Theory - Nkosikhona Duma

The modernisation theory has been described as a change process in which societies transform from being ‘traditional’ to being ‘modern’. Modernisation theory possesses cultural, economic and political components. The writer concedes the presence of sound arguments emanating on the part of modernisation theory proponents however the writer finds the theory ignorant of many facts that characterise both our contemporary world and history. The writer, therefore, argues and supports the notion that modernisation theory possesses limitations which bring into deterioration its credibility and relevance.

Green (2008) quoted in Ntini (2016:56) submits that modernisation is a change process in which societies evolve from being ‘traditional’ to being ‘modern’ on. The Cambridge online dictionary seems to concur with the definition offered by Green as it states, “modernisation is the process of starting to use the most recent methods, ideas, equipment, etc. so that something becomes or seems more modern”. Huntington (1968a:52) quoted in Tipps (1973:201) submits modernisation as, “a multi-faceted process involving changes in all areas of human thought and activity”. Acknowledging the aforestated definitions would entail appreciating that at their core belongs the sometimes uncomfortable business of transformation and change. According to Kreutzmann (1998) and Green (2008) quoted in Ntini (2016:56), change in modernisation theory terms necessitates that the rest of the world adopt and implement a global development model at the courtesy of the United States and partner nations in order to be able reach similar levels of development. It is on the basis that according to modernisation theory all countries of the world ought to mimic and imitate the values and norms of countries such as the United States in order to be fully developed that the writer dissents with the modernisation theory. Our contemporary world and history presents us with empirical evidence to counter the claims advanced by modernisation theory proponents.

Perhaps it is correct to commence with outlining the historical inconsistencies of the modernisation theory if the writer is to detail the limitations of the modernisation theory. The writer finds that in its essence, modernisation theory fails to include the historical aggression and violation that the majority of developing countries have had to contend with (for most of history) erupting on the part of the majority of countries that are now considered “first world countries”. Indeed Ntini (2016:62) confirms the inconsistency of the modernisation theory when he states, “the researcher finds it [modernisation theory] silent about the slave trade and colonialism, the very practice that laid the foundation stones of economic bloom for Western/First World countries”. The writer notes that modernisation theory is historically inconsistent if it expects all countries of the world to follow the Western model even if they do not share similar history and/or challenges with Western nations. Bundy further presents us with more another reason as to why developing countries are not at the level of Western nations when it comes to development. Bundy (1972, 1977) quoted in Coetzee et al (2001:84), disproved the myth that the lack of development on the part of developing countries lies in their ‘primitive’ beliefs and suggests that the ‘backwardness’ of African societies is due to an active strategy of underdeveloping these countries so that they remain subservient to Western countries at the core. Bundy’s assertion, which possesses close ties to the dependency theory, should be regarded as a strong point of debate supporting the notion that it is ludicrous to expect countries to develop if both historical and contemporary settings are actively underdeveloping developing countries.

Another great flaw of modernisation theory is its component of what Peter Evans terms ‘institutional monocropping’. Evans (2004:30) defines institutional monocropping as the imposition of blueprints based on idealised versions of Anglo-American institutions, the applicability of that which is presumed to transcend national circumstances and cultures. The danger of pursuing modernisation lies in the fact that it positions poor nations at the receiving end of ideas, values or systems that may not fit in to their current ecologies, value systems, geographies, etc. Put simply, mimicking some values and habits of the Western world will add to a further identity crisis in the developing world and may not even render any positive outcome. Choices of housing, clothing, cuisine, etc. are influenced by ecologies and geographies in which people reside. Therefore, expecting all people of developing countries to wear similar clothing to Western countries, build houses in the same manner as Western countries, speak in the manner as Western countries, etc. would be ignorant of the different environment of the peoples of developing countries and will lead to a loss of identity as this will entail abandoning their cultures. World ecologies are diverse and what works in Europe or the United States may not necessarily work in parts of the developing world.

Perhaps terming modernisation theory as arrogant and disrespectful may be appropriate if we are to consider the manner in which it elevates Westernisation as possessing that which countries of the third world ought to aspire to possess and the manner in which it relegates all the other indigenous cultures, inventions, philosophies, values and lifestyles of the world. It is common knowledge that long before European arrival in Africa, in the Americas, in Asia; the indigenous peoples of these regions were able to heal themselves employing the use of traditional medicine, were able to build shelter appropriate for them, devoured rich cuisine after the harvesting of indigenous crops and furthermore, the indigenous peoples of these regions possessed strong value and faith systems such as filial piety (the virtue of respect for elders – Confucianism). In southern Africa, Ngunis and Africans alike practiced their religions and had a thriving culture characterised by dance, music, hierarchy, etc. and in Great Zimbabwe, an empire was built. In its misappropriation of history, modernisation theory fails to detail these practices and how they were disturbed. Kruger (2008:3) quoted in Ntini (2016:57) suggests that the abandoning of traditional values and institutions and harmony with the West is a pre-requisite for development. Although Kruger elevates Westernisation as a standard by which development ought to be measured and which developing countries should aspire to achieve, she fails to submit why other paths to development should be overlooked and why developing countries should only look at Western countries for development models.

It can be argued that modernisation theory has a vague conception of the unfair international systems that currently characterise international relations in its disingenuous opinion that the mimicry of the West is the only true path to the attainment of development. Ntini (2016:60) rightfully asserts that, “today’s world is a product of processes recorded in the history of intercontinental and international affairs.” The writer appreciates this submission as correct and states that one cannot ignore the real historical reasons for why the world is as it is today. Evans (2004:32) presents with a component of international relations that is a barrier to the development of third world countries and asserts that, “current struggles over intellectual property rights are indicative of the frustrations of poor countries over the ability of rich countries to continue monopolising the returns from new ideas.” The use of intellectual property rights to block poor countries from attaining development backs Bundy’s submission that there is an active underdevelopment project of third world countries. This should also highlight the fact that even if poor countries wanted to import some Western traits they feel could render positive outcomes, property rights would be used against these poor countries. Evans (2004:35) further reiterates the unfairness of the international system when he cites the structural adjustments programmes (SAPs) of the International Financial Institutions (IFIs) as systems that contribute to the underdevelopment of third world countries. The writer concludes that the deliberate cultural carnage of third world countries by the West and the current measures of underdeveloping third world countries, particularly by the IFIs, are some of the real barriers to development, and dismisses the notion that the lack of development in third world countries is due to the absence of Westernisation in these parts.

Modernisation theory misappropriates the truth by placing Westernisation on a pedestal as the sole model of development, one that which third world countries ought to imitate. Modernisation theory loses its credibility when it fails to mention other paths to development. Ntini (2016) cites countries, like China and Japan, which have witnessed major developments without having gone the route stipulated by modernisation theory proponents. The same can be suggested for Arab nations such as the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, etc. These countries are known for their conservative traditional lifestyles guided by Muslim principles, by some modernisation proponents, these countries are ‘primitive’ and ‘backward’, but reality would differ with this assertion. These countries are some of the richest in the world, with some of the most expensive material possessions, with populations leading high standards of living and high life expectancies. These countries have always been adamant in their ambition to maintain their culture, values, religion and lifestyles; it can be argued that they have never adopted modernisation theory as a developmental model and yet they have seen large progress and have become one of the strong role players in international relations.

In conclusion, the writer makes it clear that he supports the notion that modernisation theory possesses great limitations and is characterised by historical inconsistencies and institutional monocropping. Furthermore, the writer notes that modernisation theory unjustifiably elevates Westernisation ignoring the presence of other routes to development. The writer submits and presents proof that modernisation theory is ignorant of the unfair playing field that has characterised the world system since the inception of contemporary international relations. There clearly exist other forms of development and each region should be allowed the freedom to develop without hindrances or oppression so as to embrace the beautiful indigenous cultures of the world. The indigenous peoples of the world should never be brainwashed to rid themselves of their identities and be bombarded to pursue flawed theories that will ultimately bring about the destruction of local cultures and indigenous knowledge. It remains imperative that people, if they so wish, lead a life that they feel is appropriate for them without being manipulated and condescended upon by terms such as ‘backward’, ‘primitive’, ‘irrational’, or ‘fatalistic’ especially if they elect to follow customs that have guided their existence and meaning.

REFERENCES

Cambridge Dictionaries Online : http://dictionary.cambridge.org

Evans, P. (2004) ‘Development as Institutional Change: The Pitfalls of Monocropping and the Potentials of Deliberation.’ Studies in Comparative International Development. 38(4), 30-52

Graaf, J.; Venter, D. (2001) ‘Understanding the World System’ in Coetzee, J.K.; Graaf, J.; Hendricks F.; Wood G. (eds.) Development: Theory, Policy and Practice. Cape Town: Oxford University Press. 77-95

Ntini, E. (2016) ‘Today’s World: Can Modernisation Theory Still Explain It Convincingly?’ J Sociology Soc Anth, 7(1), 56-67

Tipps, D.C. (1973) ‘Modernization Theory and the Comparative Study of Societies: A Critical Perspective.’ Comparative Studies in Society and History. 15(2), 199-226

The social construction of race and its impact

“...race is not biologically determined but rather socially constructed” (Beuchler, 2008: 128). 

Race, a concept that has been termed by various scholars as a ‘cultural invention’ and a ‘biological fiction’, has received a great deal of attention from sociologists and academics whose usual primary motivation is to expose the absurdity of the claim that race is biological, that race is more than the exterior surface of the human body. The aim of this essay, therefore, is to contribute to the debate by offering support to those that assert that race is not biologically determined, but rather socially constructed. Furthermore it aims to elaborate further on how racial identities are formed, the social constructionist understandings of ‘race’,  legacies & consequences of race, and finally the work that has been invested to combat it.

Unfortunately, for many generations, the myth that race or the colour of one’s skin bears an intrinsic link to one’s biological make up had been widely accepted especially after the seventeenth century where many ideologies linked to race started to emerge. Consequently, the world over, race has become a determinant of human identity – what Mary Corrigally refers to as the superficial manifestation of identity in her review of the movie Skin. Smedley (1998) asserts how this form of human identification has been tragic particularly for those who are at the receiving end of race such as African Americans and other minorities in the United States. There are reasons for why race came to play such a vital role in the construction of our society today. One of the reasons are the superiority-inferiority complex relations that characterised the encounters between Europeans and populations of countries that would later become their colonies. Indeed, many academics assert that Europeans viewed themselves as “civilised” due to their possession of ‘superior’ technology. As Europeans were of a different race to the peoples of their colonies, race had to determine the social hierarchy, placing Europeans at the top, in order for colonialist countries to maintain their rule and power. Thus Beuchler (2008:130) submits, “the social construction of race and racism was vital in legitimizing European colonization and conquest.” This can be suggested as ample evidence that mankind planned the deliberate advantaging of a people through the disenfranchisement and oppression of another using race.

Planned racial divides have dictated how societies all over the world are constructed. In South Africa, both colonialism and Apartheid have been consistent with each other in how they have perpetuated racial stratification. The ramifications of race in constructing society have included the poor development of those at the receiving end of racism such as black South Africans who have poor access to education, health care, land, housing, etc. in comparison to their white counterparts. The results have also been psychological in the sense that some black people have accepted the myth that white people by the virtue of their skin colour are superior and that black people, through their pigmentation, are inferior to whiteness. It can be argued that the psychological outcomes of the construction of many societies today are most tragic. They are harder to combat as it is generally difficult to change people’s attitudes.

The formation of individual identities include more than just ‘race’, the society in which one is born and ethnicity also shapes one’s identity, which comprises of language, customs, norms, values, religious beliefs, etc. Human identities are also shaped by social environments and it can also be argued that human beings have the option of choosing an identity. The way in which societies are constructed all over the world dictate that “western” or “white” traits are the ones that people ought pursue, failure to do so will result in them being labelled as anti-progress, uncivilised and barbaric. The scenery in South Africa, just like in many countries where there are black and white people, is a clear indication of how race is always a subject almost guaranteed to attract dissenting views. This is because colonialism and racism were also implemented and maintained for centuries in South Africa just as in most parts of the world. The way in which contemporary identities are constructed in South Africa are such that whiteness still reigns supreme over blackness as the means of production are still predominantly owned by white people. The idea that is perpetuated is that in order for black people to achieve the superior status that white people enjoy, black people have to lose their blackness and adopt whiteness as an identity hence Durrheim and Mtose submit (2006:204) “whiteness is set up as the standard against which blackness is found to be deficient”. In the study by Durrheim and Mtose (2006), a question is posed upon a white male university student, if he would mind living with a black person to which he responds, “I would mind living with a black black, I would mind if they struggled to speak English and it would be better if they were more like us.” Black people that succeed in this quest of adopting whiteness are labelled as ‘coconuts’, ‘oreos’ or simply ‘white blacks’. Tragically, ‘black blacks’ are cast down the social hierarchy as there are tendencies of the continued perpetuation of the tradition of white supremacy, mostly by white people as evidenced in the aforementioned study.

The consequences of a racially constructed society are abysmal for those deliberately placed to be at the receiving end of race. Sadly, racism and prejudice in countries such as ours run deep and ancient and it is still not uncommon to find those targeted by racism (mostly black people) still elucidating the trauma of being denied a job, access to a hotel or restaurant, the experience of being hurled racist slurs at, the list goes on, but the point remains: racism is horrible and traumatizes people unjustifiably, it is morally repugnant and should be repudiated. It creates the unnecessary task of people having to seek affirmation that beauty is not defined by skin colour or race.

Fortunately, the world has experienced progressive action taken to combat racism and the racial structure of the world. There have been policies taken by policy makers and ground breaking court decisions aimed at making our society inclusive. However, as there are still cases of racism and racial profiling still taking place today, the world still has a great responsibility to invest its resources into the work of combating racism.

In conclusion, I submit that I remain supportive of the view that we should not to place race at such at such a high place in society that we seek to believe that it is more than the exterior surface of the human body. We should not be at point where we are still disputing whether race is biological or not, when it has long been established that is not. There aren’t any superior/inferior traits that one inherits from a ‘race’. The social construction of race in a society harms people and convinces them that they have to lose a sense of what builds up their identity and assimilate into another; as is the case with ‘coconuts’ or ‘white blacks’. There are still cases of discrimination and racism and as such the war to end racism has not been won yet, there still has to be concerted effort especially by those that benefit from race, in this view we can suggest that white people that still possess a mentality of white supremacy must rid themselves of it and black people must regain pride in their culture and language and concede as Biko suggested that blackness is not inferior. 

Xenophobia is unjustified

A 14 year old boy was killed during these Afrophobic/Xenophobic attacks in Durban this week. Who knows? He could've been a doctor, an accountant or a revolutionary politician that could've brought positive change in his country.

And he was robbed of the opportunity, he was robbed of time to prove himself, mercilessly he was massacred because of his originality and dark skin. He comes from a people accused of dealing in drugs, stealing 'our women', taking away employment, etc.

What drugs did a 14 year old manufacture? What women did he steal? Who's job did he take? Is it okay to blame an entire people becuase of the acts of the few? Are these the only people capable of doing bad things?

My heart aches as the unfounded and illogical attempted justifications of this hedious crime don't make sense at all. I engaged one of the perpetrators, yesterday at the at the taxi rank, on his perpetuation of this hate. He's so stupid, I almost vomited. Clearly, there's a lot of inane people in our society, unfortunately.

What is even worse is all these people on my facebook saying that it's wrong for an African to kill another African. This disingenouos thinking creates space for the targetting of other ethnicities. How about we say, we are all human? How about we say, it's wrong for humans to kill other human on unjustifiable grounds?

Just know that, that 14 year old boy, was also human. He was someone's son, friend, sibling, cousin. He had people he hung out with, he probably liked the same music that you do and laughed at the same jokes. He was probably tickled by his uncles and aunts when he was just a baby, which was not so long ago. He was human, he was a full human but that was ignored and he was murdered by remorseless thugs!!

Ukubaluleka kokuzithoba

Isisho esithi 'umuntu ngumuntu ngabantu' isisho esidumile futhi isisho esithandwa kakhulu abantu abamnyama, ikakhulukazi thina bantu besiszwe sakwaZulu.

Lesi sisho ngiyasithanda ngoba sibhanqga wonke umuntu, asisho ukuthi isigwili, isahlupheki, ingane, omnyama, omhlophe, owesilisa noma owesifazane ngumuntu ngabantu kodwa sithi umuntu ngumuntu ngabantu. Lesi sisho ke sizala ingqikithi yokubaluleka kokuzithoba. Ukuzithoba ke akuyona into ejulukisa umhlane kodwa into ethatha ukutshela ingqondo ukuthi phela umuntu ngumuntu ngabantu, uma usumila impakamo, uvukelwa amathumbu emakhwapheni ubani oyokusiza ezikhathini zezivunguvungu?

Uma ngingenza isibonelo ngabantu abakhombise ukuzithoba benethuba lokwenza ngaphandle kwakho uNelson Mandela nosaziwayo waseMelika u-Oprah Winfrey. UNelson Mandela ubehlezi ekuqgamisa aukubaluleka kokuzithoba. Impela umvuzo wokwenza kwakhe kumnike ukuthandwa wumhlaba wonke nomngcwabo wakhe waba indumezulu. U-Oprah yena owomunye wabambalwa engeke uzwe lutho olubi ngabo emaphepheni noma izindabeni. Noma ngabe ikephi lapho afika khona othola ukujabulelwa okukhulu.

Baningi-ke abagcwele impakamo kanti laba bantu bathole imivuzo yakho loko. Phela isalakutshelwa sibona ngomopho. Omunye walabantu usaziwayo osehamba emhlabeni u-Amy Winehouse. U-Amy wagcina ngokubona igodi ngoba wayengaleli izihlobo nabangani bakhe bemkhuza ngezidakamizwa.

Baningi ke abanye abantu abalahlwe impakamo, abakushaye phansi ukuzithoba njengo Muamar Gaddafi waseLibya, uRobert Mugabe waseZimbabwe kanye banyé.

Khumbula phela isalakutshelwa sibona ngomopho.

A Suicidal Poem

I used to watch in the TV
And I asked myself "why?"
People talked about it
And I asked myself "why?"

Until I knew exactly
"why" they did it
Maybe they were tired of being
saddened by their own
families
Maybe they were tired of being outshined,
saddened, mocked, overlooked betrayed
by their
own friends.

There comes a time in life
where one has had enough,
where one's dreams are shattered down,
where one is PUSHED by their LOVED ONES
To end their fate, to take their own life

And when one decides to seek advice,
They say stop feeling sorry for yourself
and do something about it...

What if you can't do anything
about it?
Is that enough?
Is that the best you can offer your loved one?
When someone kills themselves, somebody
somehow, somewhere is partly to blame.

The Strength We All Never Realised - Nkosikhona Duma

Within us all lies a possibility
we all never realised,
it bears the scent
from a kiss of a flower.

Within our beauty subsides
Our negative habits, our fears,
our weaknesses, our myopia, our flaws
These disappoint me greatly as my
dream of an ever-so-perfect generation is
brought to reality.

Tuning to my positive gear
I also realise that within us all
lies the capacity to fight all evil surrounding.
Whether betrayed, mocked, overlooked, we will
get up because we know what's right and
what lies ahead.

Moreso, because we are capable to do so
Within us dwells the Angelic glory so pure
and so profound that may shed our tears and
have our hearts beaten to the ground,
we will stand, yes, we will stand
Moreso, because we are capable to do so

The wounds that are so afflicting us
shall all vanish because
I believe in the strength
we all possess
It's the strength we are all not realising


-Nkosikhona Raphael Duma

Just like every other device. I wish life had a restart button - Zothani Msomi

From the womb;
She wouldve thought it was a tomb
...Ngoba ngabe ngithulise okwesdumbu.
When she touched her belly,
I'd move.
Afterall, she is my mommy
And I'd only want to improve her mood.

To birth,
I'd cry just to alert her I'm alive.
At her first beautiful glance,
I'd give her my biggest smile.
During the day, she'd be super busy
Kodwa ubsuku bakhe buyobe bunjenge njwayelo
Because I'd want to be sleepy.

I'd help her help me!
Sengisho uma eseng'sukumisa,
Lapho sek'fanele ng'cathule
Ngisho lapho seng'culelwa k'thiwa "hheda".

I'd say the words she wants to hear,
Ones that make her shed a tear
...So sweet and cashmere.
"Mama" would totally be the first.
"Ngyak'thanda" would be a regular.
To that, I'd want her to burst
To what I love most, her laughter.

Top grades
Throuhout my grades.
On parents meetings,
She'd be the happiest
From their beginnings
To their endings.

Now I want her treasure to be unique
One that will not bring any critique.
A piece of newspaper!
One that she would doubtlessly brag about
For I want it to be because of her daughter
That she is extremely proud!

-Zothani Msomi