Modernization Theory : An Effective Method For Development Essay

Valenzuela and Valenzuela first begin by discussing the modernization perspective, its assumptions and how this perspective relates to Latin America underdevelopment (1978, p.537). Valenzuela and Valenzuela determined that modernization literature assumes that for a society to modernize it must reject traditional values and patterns. Essentially, it is the internal traditional practises that need to be dismantled for modernization to take place.

The two theories which shall be compared are the modernisation theory and Neo Liberalism. The modernisation theory is a market oriented development theory which states that low income countries can develop economically if they give up their traditional ways which often can be dated back centuries and take on more modern economic principles, technologies and cultural values which comprise of an emphasis on productive investment and savings.

Modernization theory is a unilinear process in which stated that every society goes through the same process of modernization (Smelser, 1988, p.2). The idea of modernization came in Turkey while Mustafa Kemal Atatürk came into power after the world war one by defeating Ottoman Empire through Young Turks. Ottoman Empire was ruling Turkey for more than five decades; at first they were ruling Turkey through absolute monarchy latter they change it to constitutional monarchy. It was one of the strongest powers on that time the power was decentralized on the hand of Ottoman Empire; large portion of development took place which lay out the foundation or basis for process of

In this essay, I will argue that the article “The Great Divide in the Global Village” by Bruce R. Scott provides more logical and factual evidence that helps under the complexity of national economic growth and development. Scott states a catching yet quick statement about how economical promises of the world, both domestic and foreign are misleading. He states “Mainstream economic thought promises that globalization will lead to a widespread improvement in average incomes.” However the evidence throughout the article that proves this statement is not valid. Scott’s main point revolves around this idea of globalization. Globalization can be defined as the process of increasing the connectivity and interdependence of the world 's markets and businesses. Globalization is the foundation of Scott’s article it lays the groundwork for countries to succeed or fail as explained by Scott in great detail. On the other hand, in the article “Why Nations Fail” by Daron Acemoglu and James A. Robinson they paint an extremely different projection that I will contrast and eventually show why it is inferior to Scott’s work.

True Cost: Identify a character in the documentary whose view aligns with the Modernization Theory, as well as two characters whose views align with the Dependency Theory.

A thorough interpretation of the assigned source is required before arguments to validate the position of the essay is offered. This source is linked to some of the concepts of globalization like transcendence. Considering that globalization was meant to keep the world connected and to help decrease things like poverty and the the digital divide. Globalization has only aided in helping the rich get wealthier and leaving the underprivileged to fend for themselves. The author of the source is heavily biased toward the vast poor, as a result the audience this source is targeting are the elite rich, world leaders, and economic powerhouses of the world.

Thus, according to this theory, underdeveloped countries are perceived as "backward" compared to developed countries as models for having reached the final stage of development presented by Rostow [2]. As highlighted sociologists' modernization Talcott Parsons (1951) and Alex Inkeless (1964), changing values and social structures is a fundamental basis of the process of economic development of a country factor. Indeed, the traditional values of a country need to be replaced by modern Western values , emphasizing individualism and rationality, because without this change of mentality, traditional societies cannot develop modern institutions it are needed to promote progress and economic growth, the ultimate goals of modernization, and ensure the maintenance of order can be challenged by the changes that cause the development [3].

8). Modernization theory is defined by Rudolph (2005) as, “the idea, of the reproduction of the West through the replication of its stages of growth, endures a theme in American social science and public policy” (p. 8). It was argued by Universalist (people who believed in the Modernization theory) at this time like Max Weber, that history needed to be revisited. Through the teleological framework, accounts of history, one could see: the high roads to modernity or dustbins of history. The problem with this is that, developing societies were expected to transition to the predetermined ensemble of Western modernity; but were also to discard the equally coherent contrasting features into the dustbins of history (Rudolph, 2005,

Capitalism is an economic system in a society in which private owners control industry and trade within a country, rather than the state. Both Karl Marx and Max Weber, have written theories on how this system develops in countries and creates a nation state that is characterised by production and wealth. Marx’s theory takes more of a top-down approach, suggesting that people have little power in how their society is run. On the other hand, Weber’s bottom-up approach demonstrates how people have the ability to initiate capitalism and change their society. Marx’s theory of historical materialism is based on a 5-stage system inevitable of any society, Weber’s theory of The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism states that it was a much smaller group within a feudal society whose religiosity inadvertently kick-started capitalism. Although both these theories look at how capitalism develops within a society, Marx’s macro-scale theory is more applicable to every society, unlike Weber’s micro-scale approach that focuses on one group within society and their ‘spirit of capitalism’. Naturally, the theories vary due to the time of writing and the economic or political situation. Marx wrote of historical materialism during a German economic crisis, whereas Weber wrote his theory a generation after, seeing the economy develop and stabilise. This impacted the message they were portraying and influenced two opposing theories.

Modernization theory is a hypothesis used to clarify the procedure of modernization that a country experiences as it moves from a simple society to a modern one. Dependency theory is the idea that assets spill out of a fringe of poor and immature states to a centre of rich states, enhancing the latter to the detriment of the former. These two theories contrast in that modernization theory clarifies how created states work and develop, whereas dependency theory outline how work and develop are restricted. Modernization theory clarifies the advancement and improvement of innovation in more steady regions of the world (Culp, 2014). Dependency theory looks at the impacts that modernization in one district has on different parts of the world. Dependency theory is more comprehensive than modernization theory. Modernization theory emphasises that instruction, innovation and broad communications are noteworthy reasons why created districts pull ahead from others. Be that as it may, modernization theory does not operate on a worldwide scale where the assets, work and power originate to make this advancement conceivable. In modernization theory, the majority of the advancements that local areas or states make originate from an aggregate interior exertion.

In this contrasting view, modernization can be viewed as a process of individualization, specialization and abstraction. In the structure of modern society, the individual dominates the collective. The division of labour is complex. People become alienated from the process of production as specialization increases and their occupations become more specific, consequently disconnecting them from the products of their labour. Moreover, modern societies facilitate a worldview that is abstract. While traditional societies are based on similarity, modern societies are based on differences, thus differentiating the way

Modernization theory and dependency theory can be seen as the two most important development theories of the 20th century. Modernization theory of development can be first credited to Walt Rostow. According to Rostow, “ It is possible to identify all societies in their economic dimensions, as lying in one of the five categories: the traditional society, the precondition for takeoff stage, the takeoff stage, the drive to maturity stage, and the age of mass consumption stage. Rostow believed that every country moves from one discrete state to the next. Modernization theory considered that all countries exist along various points of single developmental path. Every country fell along the same developmental spectrum. The modernization theorists maintained that the today’s developed countries have gone through all the stages of development and the developed nations were also underdeveloped at some point in time. All the nations go through the stages of industrialization and capitalism to become developed. The modernization theory runs on the assumption that underdeveloped countries are underdeveloped because they lack the requisite capital, proper institutions and ethos of entrepreneurship and rationality.

A nation can develop to prosperity or under develop to devastation. Modernization theory and dependency theory are competing strategies of how to lead a country towards development. Modernization theory contends free enterprise and international trade are two elements that lead toward positive development. Modernization causes a gradual differentiation and specialization of social and political structures that makes democracy possible. In opposition to modernization theory is dependency theory which states capitalistic countries of the north dominate the global economy. The countries that dominate the world economy are known as the “core” while the nations they allegedly exploit are referred to as the “periphery.”

Modernization is the process of social changes that began in Europe with the start of the industrial revolution and spread to the United States. This put us on the path of social changes that transformed in to the modern society that we live in today. Modernization promoted a more balanced and logic worldview as tradition loses its hold and people increase their individualization. The trends that encompass

Sam and Jane are not alone in this, Westernization or Modernization are two ideologies that are under constant debate. Some of us consider the two terms to go hand in hand with each other. A lot of questions are asked but the main one will always be: “Does Globalization mean the same thing as Westernization and the thing as Modernization?”