THE CONCEPT OF MODERNISATION

The Concept of Modernization 20/10/2010

India is the world’s youngest nation with sixty percent of its population under the age of twenty five. That makes a staggering 612 million young people. India along with China is one of the fastest growing economics I the world, leading to a massive urbanization in search of a livelihood , education or a better life in general. Young independent and prosperous would describe a typical urban Indian society.
These may seem to be ideal attributes, but cut off from one’s roots, without proper guidance and with excessive disposable income, the young urbanities of India are indulging in counter-productive thoughts, interactions and desires. Steeped in materialism and the samskaras of consumerism, they lose out on the beauty and simplicity of life. I am also one among the youth of India.
Perceptions differ about modernity, and how people can correlate it in a wrong sense. A person's life is his own, so let people live the way they want to. A modern mind therefore is not judgmental.

MODERNISATION WAS a global impact of westernization that arose out of industrial revolution and its impact in the West. In actuality, it relates to freedom of work and social mobility. The independence to choose what one likes to do without bothering others.
Modernization is not only economic development but also evolution of minds. It is not stagnant but an ongoing process. There are many people who often link modernity to western clothes. God knows what strikes their mind to think about it in this way? People have a mentality that if one is wearing western clothes that means he or she thinks they are modern. The truth is that they like to dress this way.
Modernization theory makes the claim that Western capitalist values and practices are the basis for “modernizing” third world countries and helping them become self-sustaining. However, Latin America feels that following the modernization theory would only widen the gap between first and third world countries, causing the third world countries to depend even greater upon the first world countries for survival. If this were true, then modernization for women in these countries would also be negatively affected. In this paper, I will evaluate the views of both the modernization theory of the first world countries and the opposing view of the third world countries, and I will establish that even though modernization can benefit third world countries, it is not the best solution.

We have seen that modernization has actually hindered the development of third world countries. It is true, that third world countries do not have the modern conveniences and attitudes that accompany developed first world countries, but in order for them to become developed, they have to leave too much of who they are traditionally behind them in the process. They have societies that have worked for them for centuries, and if developed first world countries try to modernize them, they will only bring greater problems to the global community. Third world countries will lose their natural resources through unfair trade with first world countries, and problems facing women in these countries will only be intensified. Cooperative production that is fair is the only way that will ease the struggles of third world nations. Through cooperative production between men and women, and through fair compensation for both men and women, their lives will also exist in a better balance as they are recognized as equal contributors to their respective societies.


It should be clear that modernization has never affected Indian society. Only a handful of cities are influenced by modernization. It has untouched the rural lives in all means from clothing to cultures. This is nothing but merely people’s perception. Modernity lies in the brain. The broadness of your thoughts and actions shows how much modern you are. It lies in mind not in clothes. Your views and thoughts about any particular thing make you modern. Modernization has improved our lifestyle for sure, and standard of living has improved and will develop even more. It would be wrong to take it in a bad aspect or to overlook it. So the next time when you look at someone do not judge his modernity by his lifestyle but his thoughts and actions.

Now in India, we have had the crisis about cultural identity with us for centuries; but it acquired a new form and content following the encounter with the West. It is in this context that the dilemmas of a man like Jawaharlal Nehru appear poignant and the challenge hurled at the Western civilization by Mahatma Gandhi becomes a major historical event. It is not the content of this challenge which is so important as the intention -- a repudiation of the basic premises of the industrial civilization -- and the mode of expression. A Japanese historian, Minoru Kasai, in his published lecture on Gandhi and the contemporary world, has pointed out that Gandhi is as relevant to Japan in her present predicament as he has been and continues to be India in hers. In fact, Kasai emphasizes the universal import of Gandhi's vision.

This is a democratic country where people are free to speak their mind but do not let your right hurt others' sentiments. If someone can handle his life the way he wants then there is no need for indulgence or interference of others. Other cultures and traditions have influenced one another. An individual interest will make him copy a certain culture. This is what modernization stands for. Like a famous quote goes “Modern civilization is complicated and artificial. Simple folk live in a world of love and peace. Let no one hate another or harm another.”

India has the distinction of evolving one of the longest continuing civilization in the world, which is constantly adapted itself to the changing political and socio-economic contents and specific watershed events in her history. Her family system has proved to be a remarkable stable unit of society which has shown great flexibility and adaptability in the phase of rapid social changes. This paper briefly traces the past taken by India in the modernization process, then analyzes the impact of social change of family structure, functions, roles, relationships and status of its members and its relationship with kinship system.

Lastly, it draws implications for counseling interventions based on the changing needs of contemporary Indian Families.

I may conclude by referring to a wise book, Japanese Culture, by the Japanese anthropologist, Eiichiro Ishida, published in 1974, in which he cautions against any oversimplified notions about intercultural understanding. He says that there would always be a residue of Japanese culture that would remain inaccessible to the Europeans, and vice versa. The same would apply to an Indo-Japanese cultural dialogue also. Will you ever quite get at the roots of our preoccupation with religion? And will we ever get hold of the mainsprings of your pragmatism? But India also said that, though difficult, intercultural understanding is worth striving for. The common element in the Japanese and Indian experience of the last hundred years or so has been our encounter with the West. Maybe we have significant things to tell each other about this experience -- about the agonies of refashioning cultural identity. Hence the great importance of the theme of this symposium.

Siddhartha shnakar mishra,
Bureau Chief,
These Days, Tasver E Hind,
Orissa, Sambalpur