Small Assisgnment

lovlyl

society_11e_ch16.pdf

Home >English homework help >Small Assisgnment

Social Change: Modern and Postmodern Societies16

IS B

N 1-256-36957-8

• Why do societies change?

• How do social movements both encourage and resist social change?

the Core Concepts in Sociology video “Defining Social Movements” on mysoclab.com

• What do sociologists say is good and bad about today’s society?

Watch

IS B

N 1-

25 6-

36 95

7- 8

It is difficult for most people today to imagine how different life was a century ago. Not only was life much harder back then, but it was also much shorter. Statistical records show that life expectancy was just forty-six years for men and forty-eight years for women, compared to about seventy-five and eighty years today, respectively (Xu et al., 2010).

Over the course of the past century, much has changed for the better. Yet as this chapter explains, social change is not all positive. Change has negative consequences too, causing unexpected new prob- lems. Early sociologists had a mixed assessment of modernity, changes brought about by the Industrial Revolution. Likewise, today’s sociol-

ogists point to both good and bad aspects of postmodernity, the trans- formations caused by the Information Revolution and the postindus- trial economy. One thing is clear: For better or worse, the rate of change has never been faster than it is now.

What Is Social Change? In earlier chapters, we examined relatively fixed or static social pat- terns, including status and role, social stratification, and social insti- tutions. We also looked at the dynamic forces that have shaped our way

478 CHAPTER 16 Social Change: Modern and Postmodern Societies

Chapter Overview This chapter explores social change, explaining how modern societies differ from earlier, traditional societies. The chapter discusses many causes of change, including disasters and social movements.

The five-story red brick apartment building at 253 East Tenth Street in

New York has been standing for more than a century. In 1900, one of the

twenty small apartments in the building was occupied by thirty-nine-year-old Julius Streicher;

Christine Streicher, age thirty-three; and their four young children. The Streichers were immi-

grants, both having come in 1885 from their native Germany to New York, where they met

and married.

The Streichers probably considered themselves successful. Julius operated a small

clothing shop a few blocks from his apartment; Christine stayed at home, raised the children,

and did housework. Like most people in the country at that time, neither Julius nor Christine

had graduated from high school, and they worked for ten to twelve hours a day, six days a

week. Their income—average for that time—was about $35 a month, or about $425 per year.

(In today’s dollars, that would be slightly more than $11,000, which would put the family well below the poverty

line.) They spent almost half of their income for food; most of the rest went for rent.

Today, Dorothy Sabo resides at 253 East Tenth Street, living alone in the same apartment where the Streichers

spent much of their lives. Now eighty-seven, she is retired from a career teaching art at a nearby museum. In many

respects, Sabo’s life has been far easier than the life the Streichers knew. For one thing, when the Streichers lived

there, the building had no electricity (people used kerosene lamps and candles) and no running water (Christine

Streicher spent most of every Monday doing laundry using water she carried from a public fountain at the end of

the block). There were no telephones, no television, and of course no computers. Today, Dorothy Sabo takes such

conveniences for granted. Although she is hardly rich, her pension and Social Security amount to several times as

much (in constant dollars) as the Streichers earned.

Sabo has her own worries. She is concerned about the environment and often speaks out about global warm-

ing. But a century ago, if the Streichers and their neighbors were concerned about “the environment,” they proba-

bly would have meant the smell coming up from the street. At a time when motor vehicles were just beginning to

appear in New York City, carriages, trucks, and trolleys were all pulled by horses—thousands of them. These ani-

mals dumped 60,000 gallons of urine and 2.5 million pounds of manure on the streets each and every day—an

offensive mixture churned and splashed by countless wheels onto everything and everyone within a stone’s throw

of the streets (Simon & Cannon, 2001).

IS B

N 1-256-36957-8

of life, ranging from innovations in technology to the growth of bureaucracy and the expansion of cities. These are all dimensions of social change, the trans- formation of culture and social institutions over time. This complex process has four major characteristics:

1. Social change happens all the time. People used to say that the only sure things in life were “death and taxes.” Yet our thoughts about death have changed dramatically as life expectancy in the United States has nearly doubled in the past cen- tury. And back in the Streichers’ day, people in the United States paid little or no taxes on their earnings; taxation increased dramatically over the course of the twentieth century, along with the size and scope of government. In short, just about everything in life, even the “sure things,” is subject to the twists and turns of change.

Still, some societies change faster than oth- ers. As Chapter 2 (“Culture”) explained, hunt- ing and gathering societies change quite slowly; members of technologically complex societies, by contrast, can witness significant change within a single lifetime.

It is also true that in any society, some cultural elements change faster than others. William Ogburn’s theory of cultural lag (see Chapter 2) asserts that material culture (that is, things) changes faster than nonmaterial culture (ideas and attitudes). For example, genetic technology that allows scientists to alter and perhaps even create life has developed more rapidly than our ethical standards for deciding when and how to use the technology.

2. Social change is sometimes intentional but often unplanned. Industrial societies actively promote many kinds of change. Sci- entists seek more efficient forms of energy, and advertisers try to convince us that we cannot live without the latest electronic gadget. Yet rarely can anyone envision all the consequences of changes as they are set in motion.

Back in 1900, when the country still relied on horses for transportation, people looked ahead to motor vehicles that would take a single day to carry them distances that used to take weeks or months. But no one could see how much the mobility provided by automobiles would alter life in the United States, scattering family members, threatening the environment, and reshaping cities and suburbs. Nor could automotive pioneers have predicted the more than 37,000 deaths that occur in car accidents each year in the United States alone (National High- way Traffic Safety Administration, 2009).

3. Social change is controversial. The history of the automobile shows that social change brings both good and bad consequences. Cars brought an end to the muck of urine and manure on city streets, but they spewed carbon monoxide into the air. In the same contradictory way, capitalists benefited from greater pro- duction and profits made possible by the Industrial Revolution at the same time that workers pushed back against the machines that they feared would make their skills obsolete.

Today, as in the past, people disagree about how we ought to live and what we should welcome as “progress.” We see this disagreement every day in the changing patterns of social inter- action between black people and white people, women and men, and homosexuals and heterosexuals that are celebrated by some people and opposed by others.

4. Some changes matter more than others. Some changes (such as clothing fads) have only passing significance; others (like the invention of computers) may change the world. Will the Information Revolution turn out to be as important as the Industrial Revolution? Like the automobile and television, computers have both positive and negative effects, providing new kinds of jobs while eliminating old ones, isolating people in offices while linking people in global electronic networks, offering vast amounts of information while threatening per- sonal privacy.

Social Change: Modern and Postmodern Societies CHAPTER 16 479

These young men are performing in a hip-hop dance marathon in Hong Kong. Hip-hop music, dress style, and dancing have become popular in Asia, a clear case of cultural diffusion. Social change occurs as cultural patterns move from place to place, but people in different societies don’t always attach the same meanings to these patterns. How might Chinese youth understand hip-hop differently from the young African Americans in the United States who originated it?

social change the transformation of culture and social institutions over time

What would you say have been the two or three most important changes to our society that have occurred during your lifetime? Explain your answer.

Seeing Sociology in Everyday Life

IS B

N 1-

25 6-

36 95

7- 8

Causes of Social Change Social change has many causes. In a world linked by sophisticated communication and transportation technology, change in one place often sets off change elsewhere.

Culture and Change Chapter 2 (“Culture”) identified three important sources of cultural change. First, invention produces new objects, ideas, and social pat- terns. Rocket propulsion research, which began in the 1940s, has pro- duced sophisticated spacecraft that can reach toward the stars. Today we take such technology for granted; during the present century, a signif- icant number of people may well have an opportunity to travel in space.

Second, discovery occurs when people take notice of existing ele- ments of the world. For example, medical advances offer a growing understanding of the human body. Beyond their direct effects on human health, medical discoveries have extended life expectancy, setting in motion the “graying” of U.S. society (see Chapter 3,“Social- ization: From Infancy to Old Age”).

Third, diffusion creates change as products, people, and infor- mation spread from one society to another. Ralph Linton (1937a) recognized that many familiar aspects of our culture came from other lands. For example, the cloth used to make our clothing was developed in Asia, the clocks we see all around us were invented in Europe, and the coins we carry in our pockets were devised in what is now Turkey.

In general, material things change more quickly than cultural ideas. For example, breakthroughs such as the science of cloning occur faster than our understanding of when—and even whether— they are morally desirable.

Conflict and Change Inequality and conflict within a society also produce change. Karl Marx saw class conflict as the engine that drives societies from one his- torical era to another. In industrial-capitalist societies, he maintained, the struggle between capitalists and workers pushes society toward a socialist system of production.

In the more than 125 years since Marx’s death, this model has proved simplistic. Yet Marx correctly foresaw that social conflict aris- ing from inequality (involving not just class but also race and gen- der) would force changes in every society, including our own, to improve the lives of working people.

Ideas and Change Max Weber also contributed to our understanding of social change. Although Weber acknowledged that conflict could bring about change, he traced the roots of most social changes to ideas. For example, people with charisma (Martin Luther King Jr. is an exam- ple) can carry a message that changes the world.

Weber highlighted the importance of ideas by revealing how the religious beliefs of early Protestants set the stage for the spread of industrial capitalism (see Chapter 13, “Family and Religion”). The fact that industrial capitalism developed primarily in areas of West- ern Europe where the Protestant work ethic was strong proved to Weber (1958, orig. 1904–05) the power of ideas to bring about change.

Demographic Change Population patterns also play a part in social change. The typical U.S. household was almost twice as large in 1900 (4.8 people) as it is today

480 CHAPTER 16 Social Change: Modern and Postmodern Societies

ARIZONA

NEVADA

CALIFORNIA

OREGON

WASHINGTON

IDAHO

MONTANA NORTH

DAKOTA MINNESOTA

SOUTH DAKOTA

NEBRASKA

WYOMING

COLORADO

NEW MEXICO

TEXAS LOUISIANA

ARKANSAS OKLAHOMA

KANSAS MISSOURI

IOWA

WISCONSIN

MICHIGAN

ILLINOIS

INDIANA OHIO

KENTUCKY

TENNESSEE

MISSISSIPPI ALABAMA

GEORGIA

SOUTH CAROLINA

NORTH CAROLINA

VIRGINIA D.C.

WEST VIRGINIA

DELAWARE

NEW JERSEY

MARYLAND

PENNSYLVANIA

NEW YORK

CONNECTICUT RHODE ISLAND

MASSACHUSETTS

MAINE VERMONT

NEW HAMPSHIRE

FLORIDA

UTAH

High: 17.9% or more Average: 10.5% to 17.8% Low: Less than 10.4%

Proportion of Residents Who Have Not Moved in the Past Thirty Years

HAWAII

ALASKA

Martina Serfass, age 54, is a nurse who lives near Decorah, Iowa; most of the people in her community have lived there all their lives.

Serge Smith-Heiser, age 27, lives in an apartment complex in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, and thinks of his city as a place where people come and go. He arrived two years ago in search of a new job.

Seeing Ourselves NATIONAL MAP 16–1 Who Stays Put? Residential Stability across the United States

Overall, only about 15 percent of U.S. residents have not moved during the past thirty years. Counties with a higher proportion of “long-termers” typically have experienced less change over recent decades: Many neighborhoods have been in place since before World War II, and many of the same families live in them. As you look at the map, what can you say about these stable areas? What accounts for the fact that most of these counties are rural and at some distance from the coasts?

Source: U.S. Census Bureau (2000).

Explore on mysoclab.com

residential stability in your local community and in counties across the United States on mysoclab.com

Explore

IS B

N 1-256-36957-8

(2.6 people). Women are having fewer children, and more people are living alone. Change is also taking place as our population grows older. As Chapter 3 (“Socialization: From Infancy to Old Age”) explained, 13 percent of the U.S. population was over age sixty-five in 2008, three times the proportion back in 1900. By the year 2030, sen- iors will account for 20 percent of the total (U.S. Census Bureau, 2009). Medical research and health care services already focus exten- sively on the elderly, and life will change in countless other ways as homes and household products are redesigned to meet the needs of growing numbers of older consumers.

Migration within and between societies is another demographic factor that promotes change. Between 1870 and 1930, tens of mil- lions of immigrants entered the industrial cities in the United States. Millions more from rural areas joined the rush. As a result, farm communities declined, cities expanded, and by 1920 the United States had for the first time become a mostly urban nation. Similar changes are taking place today as people moving from the Snow- belt to the Sunbelt mix with new immigrants from Latin America and Asia.

Where in the United States have demographic changes been great- est, and where have they been less pronounced? National Map 16–1 provides one answer, showing counties where the largest share of peo- ple have lived in their present homes for thirty years or more.

Social Movements and Change A final cause of social change lies in the efforts of people like us. Peo- ple commonly band together to form a social movement, an organ- ized activity that encourages or discourages social change. Our nation’s history includes all kinds of social movements, from the colonial drive for independence to today’s organizations supporting or opposing abortion, gay rights, and the death penalty.

Social movements are about connecting people who share some political goal. Computer technology, including smartphones and social networking Internet sites, has made it possible for people to connect as never before. Seeing Sociology in the News on page 482 takes a closer look at the power of networking sites such as Facebook to support effective social movements.

Types of Social Movements

Researchers classify social movements according to the type of change they seek (Aberle, 1966; Cameron, 1966; Blumer, 1969). One variable asks, Who is changed? Some movements target selected people, and others try to change everyone. A second variable asks, How much change? Some movements seek only limited change in our lives; others pursue a radical transformation of society. Combin- ing these variables results in four types of social movements, shown in Figure 16–1.

Alterative social movements are the least threatening to the sta- tus quo because they seek limited change in only part of the popu- lation. Their aim is to help certain people alter their lives. Promise Keepers is one example of an alterative social movement; it encour- ages men to live more spiritual lives and be more supportive of their families.

Redemptive social movements also target specific individuals, but they seek more radical change. Their aim is to help certain peo- ple redeem their lives. For example, Alcoholics Anonymous is an organization that helps people with an alcohol addiction achieve a sober life.

Reformative social movements aim for only limited change but target everyone. The environmental movement seeks to interest everyone in protecting the natural environment.

Revolutionary social movements are the most extreme of all, working for major transformation of an entire society. Sometimes pursuing specific goals, sometimes spinning utopian dreams, these social movements, including both the left-wing Communist party (pushing for government control of the entire economy) and right- wing militia groups (seeking the destruction of “big government”) seek to radically change our way of life.

Claims Making

In 1981, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention began to track a strange disease that was killing people, most of them homo- sexual men. The disease came to be known as AIDS (acquired immune deficiency syndrome). Although AIDS was clearly a deadly disease, it was given little public or media attention. Only

Social Change: Modern and Postmodern Societies CHAPTER 16 481

Look at the various changes in the United States over the past century. In each case, think about how the change affected everyday social life.

Seeing Sociology in Everyday Life

social movement an organized activity that encourages or discourages social change

Limited Radical

Everyone

Specific Individuals

How Much Change?

Who Is Changed?

Alterative Social Movement

Redemptive Social Movement

Reformative Social Movement

Revolutionary Social Movement

FIGURE 16–1 Four Types of Social Movements There are four types of social movements, reflecting who is changed and how great the change is.

Source: Based on Aberle (1966).

IS B

N 1-

25 6-

36 95

7- 8

about five years later did the public begin to take notice of the ris- ing number of deaths and start to think of AIDS as a serious social threat.

The change in public thinking was the result of claims making, the process of trying to convince the public and public officials of the importance of joining a social movement to address a particular issue. In other words, for a social movement to form, some issue has to be defined as a problem that demands public attention. Usually, claims making begins with a small number of people. In the case of AIDS, the gay community in large cities (notably San Francisco and New York) mobilized to convince people of the dangers posed by this deadly disease. Over time, if the mass media give the issue attention and public officials speak out on behalf of the problem, it is likely that the social movement will gain strength.

Considerable public attention has now been given to AIDS, and there is ongoing research aimed at finding a cure. The process of claims making goes on all the time for dozens of issues. Today, for

example, a movement to ban the use of cell phones in automobiles has pointed to the thousands of automobile accidents each year related to the use of phones while driving; six states have now passed laws banning the use of handheld phones, and debate continues in others (McVeigh, Welch, & Bjarnason, 2003; Governors Highway Safety Association, 2010; Macionis, 2010).

Explaining Social Movements

Sociologists have developed several explanations of social move- ments. Deprivation theory holds that social movements arise among people who feel deprived of something, such as income, safe work- ing conditions, or political rights. Whether you feel deprived or not, of course, depends on what you expect in life. Thus people band together in response to relative deprivation, a perceived disadvan- tage arising from some specific comparison. This concept helps explain why movements for change surface in both good and bad times: It is not people’s absolute standing that counts but how they perceive

482 CHAPTER 16 Social Change: Modern and Postmodern Societies

Facebook Helps Spark Movements BY DAVID UNZE March 25, 2010

Austin Lee spent three years advocating for a skate park in St. Cloud, Minnesota, before he turned to Facebook.

The seventeen-year-old used to work the phones to keep his friends and supporters updated about his efforts. But when he took his campaign to the social networking site, he says his message really started to take off. The site’s value as a grassroots organizing tool was never more clear to Lee than when sixty of his 1,085 followers confirmed within a day of getting an update from him that they would be able to attend a key City Council meeting on the project.

“Facebook, I think, made a huge impact,” he said. The effort paid off. The council approved a

$500,000 skate plaza last month and council mem- bers agreed the Facebook community played a role. John Libert, vice president of the St. Cloud City Council, said he’s never gotten more e-mails and other communications about a single issue than the skate plaza in his four years on the council.

“It was definitely effective. It did influence me, to the extent that the number of people who were out there supporting it” was so large, he said. Facebook is becoming a core component for social movements, from constituent outreach for political campaigns to building support for causes, says Andrew Noyes, manager of public policy communications for Facebook.

A growing number of people are discovering that Facebook, with its 350 million members, “is about way more than simply connecting with friends,” Noyes said.

The use of Facebook to rally political support got a huge boost when President Obama relied on it during his candidacy to get his message out, Noyes said. Newly elected Senator Scott Brown, R- Mass., embraced Facebook during his campaign, Noyes said, an illustration of how the GOP is waking up to the power of social media. . . .

Levi Russell, communications director for Tea Party Express, the planned national bus tour that will host rallies across the nation to promote fis- cal conservativism and protest Obama adminis- tration policies between March 27 and April 15, says the group started its first Facebook page a lit- tle less than a year ago, and has been growing by the thousands.

“Facebook allows us to promote and organize events in a whole new way,” he said.“While it is not our primary communication tool, it is one of the most targeted and flexible tools we use. Our sup- porters are able to really take ownership of events in their area by sharing, discussing, and inviting their friends in a very visual and tangible format.”

College students looking to get support for issues have also turned to Facebook.

Casey Allen Sears, a student at The College of William and Mary in Williamsburg, Virginia, helped start a Facebook group this month in opposition to Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuc-

cinelli’s letter about discrimination policies at state public universities. Cuccinelli wrote that Vir- ginia’s public universities could not adopt policies that prohibit discrimination based on sexual ori- entation “absent specific authorization from the General Assembly.”

The Facebook group promoted a protest against Cuccinelli’s assertion that public universi- ties should back away from policies against dis- crimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

“In the forty-eight hours from the creation of the event, we had more than 700 people saying they were attending,” Sears said. “It’s really easy to organize a mass movement.” . . .

WHAT DO YOU THINK?

1. According to the article, why are Facebook and other computer-based networking sys- tems becoming a “core component for social movements”?

2. Do you think the use of Facebook for political purposes will make this country more demo- cratic? Why or why not?

3. Have you ever used Facebook or a similar networking site as part of an effort to organize a political demonstration or other social movement activity? Explain.

Adapted from “Facebook Helps Spark Movements” by David Unze. Source: USA Today, a division of Gannett Co., Inc. March 25, 2010. Reprinted with permission.

Seeing SOCIOLOGY in the

USA Today

IS B

N 1-256-36957-8

their situation in relation to the situations of others (J. C. Davies, 1962; Merton, 1968).

Mass-society theory, a second explanation, argues that social movements attract socially isolated people who join a movement in order to gain a sense of identity and purpose. From this point of view, social movements have a personal as well as a political agenda (Melucci, 1989).

Resource mobilization theory, a third theoretical scheme, links the success of any social movement to the resources that are available to it, including money, human labor, and the mass media. Because most social movements begin small, they must look beyond them- selves to mobilize the resources required for success (Val- occhi, 1996; Zhao, 1998; Passy & Giugni, 2001; Packer, 2003).

Fourth, culture theory points out that social move- ments depend not only on money and other material resources but also on cultural symbols. People must have a shared understanding of injustice in the world before they will mobilize to bring about change. In addition, specific symbols (such as photographs of the World Trade Center towers engulfed in flames after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks) helped mobilize people to support the U.S. military campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq (McAdam, McCarthy, & Zald, 1996; J. E. Williams, 2002).

Fifth, new social movements theory points out the distinctive character of recent social movements in postindustrial societies. Rather than being local matters, these movements are typically national or international in scope, and most focus on quality-of- life issues, such as the natural environment, world peace, or ani- mal rights, rather than more traditional economic issues. This broader scope of contemporary social movements results from closer ties between governments and between ordinary people around the world, who are now linked by the mass media and new information technology (Kriesi, 1989; Pakulski, 1993; Jenkins & Wallace, 1996).

Sixth and finally, political economy theory is a Marxist approach that claims that social movements arise in opposition to the capital- ist economic system, which fails to meet the needs of the majority of people. Despite great economic productivity, U.S. society is in crisis, with millions of people unable to find good jobs, living below the poverty line, and surviving without health insurance. Social move- ments arise as workers organize to demand higher wages, citizens rally for a health policy that protects everyone, and people march in opposition to spending billions to fund wars while ignoring basic needs at home (Buechler, 2000).

Stages in Social Movements

Social movements typically unfold in four stages: emergence, coales- cence, bureaucratization, and decline. The emergence of social move- ments occurs as people begin to think that all is not well. Some, such as the civil rights and women’s movements, are born of widespread dissatisfaction. Others emerge as a small group tries to mobilize the population, as when gay activists raised public concern about AIDS.

Coalescence takes place when a social movement defines itself and develops a strategy for attracting new members and “going pub- lic.” Leaders determine policies and decide on tactics, which may include demonstrations or rallies to attract media attention.

As it gains members and resources, a social movement may undergo bureaucratization. As a movement becomes established, it depends less on the charisma and talents of a few leaders and more on a professional staff, which increases the chances for the move- ment’s long-term survival.

Finally, social movements decline as resources dry up, the group faces overwhelming opposition, or members achieve their goals and lose interest. Some well-established organizations outlive their orig- inal causes and move on to new crusades; others lose touch with the idea of changing society and choose instead to become part of the “system” (Piven & Cloward, 1977; F. D. Miller, 1983).

Social Change: Modern and Postmodern Societies CHAPTER 16 483

claims making the process of trying to convince the public and public officials of the importance of joining a social movement to address a particular issue

relative deprivation a perceived disadvantage arising from some specific comparison

Review the discussion in Chapter 5 (“Groups and Organizations”) on page 122 to see how we use reference groups to decide whether we are being deprived or not.

Making the Grade

Political debate is a matter of claims making by various organizations. After the insurance giant AIG was saved from collapse by a massive government bailout, executives took millions of dollars in bonuses for themselves, claiming this served the interest of the company. The action prompted one organization to visit the executives’ homes, denouncing the bonuses as little more than greed and demanding that the money be returned.

IS B

N 1-

25 6-

36 95

7- 8

Disasters: Unexpected Change Sometimes change results from events that are both unexpected and unwelcome. A disaster is an event, generally unexpected, that causes extensive harm to people and damage to property. Disasters are of three types. Floods, earthquakes, forest fires, and hurricanes (such as Hur- ricane Katrina, which devastated the Gulf Coast in 2005) are exam- ples of natural disasters (Erikson, 2005a). A second type is the technological disaster, which is widely regarded as an accident but is more accurately the result of our inability to control technology (Erikson, 2005a). The nuclear accident at the Chernobyl power plant in Ukraine in 1986 and the spilling of millions of gallons of oil in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010 were technological disasters. A third type is the intentional disaster, in which one or more organized groups deliber- ately harm others. War, terrorist attacks, and the genocide that took place in Yugoslavia (1992–95), Rwanda (2000), and the Darfur region of Sudan (2003–10) are examples of intentional disasters.

The full scope of the harm caused by disasters may become evi- dent only many years after the event. The Thinking Globally box

describes a technological disaster that is still affecting people and their descendants more than half a century after it took place.

Kai Erikson (1976, 1994, 2005a) has investigated disasters of all types and has reached three major conclusions about the social conse- quences of disasters. First, we all know that disasters harm people and destroy property, but what most people don’t realize is that disasters also cause social damage by disrupting human community. When a dam burst and sent a mountain of water down West Virginia’s Buffalo Creek in 1972, it killed 125 people, destroyed 1,000 homes, and left 4,000 people homeless. After the waters had gone and help was stream- ing into the area, the people were paralyzed not only by the loss of fam- ily members and friends but also by the loss of their way of life. Even four decades later, they have been unable to rebuild the community life that they once knew. We can know when disasters start, Erikson points out, but we cannot know when they will end.

Second, Erikson explains that the social damage is more serious when an event involves some toxic substance, as is common with technological disasters. As the case of radiation falling on Utrik Island shows us, people feel “poisoned” when they have been exposed to a dangerous substance that they fear and over which they have no

484 CHAPTER 16 Social Change: Modern and Postmodern Societies

Sociologists classify disasters into three types. The 2010 earthquake in Haiti, which claimed several hundred thousand lives, is an example of a natural disaster. The 2010 oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico is an example of a technological disaster. The slaughter of hundreds of thousands of people and the displacement of millions more from their homes in the Darfur region of Sudan since 2003 is an example of an intentional disaster.

disaster an event, generally unexpected, that causes extensive harm to people and damage to property

Many people, including fishermen, who lost their ability to work in the wake of the 2010 oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico believed that neither BP nor government officials did all they could to help them. How can such a belief intensify the effects of a disaster?

Seeing Sociology in Everyday Life

IS B

N 1-256-36957-8

control. People in Ukraine felt much the same way after the 1986 explosion and radiation leak at the Chernobyl nuclear plant.

Third, the social damage is most serious when the disaster is caused by the actions of other people. This can happen through neg- ligence or carelessness (as in technological disasters) or through will- ful action (intentional disasters). Our belief that “other people will do us no harm” is a foundation of social life, Erikson claims. But when others act carelessly (as in the case of an oil spill) or intentionally in ways that harm us (as in the case of genocide in Darfur), survivors typically lose their trust in others to a degree that may never go away.

Modernity A central concept in the study of social change is modernity, social patterns resulting from industrialization. In everyday terms, modernity (its Latin root means “lately”) refers to the present in relation to the past. Sociologists use this catchall concept to describe the many social patterns set in motion by the Industrial Revolution, which began in Western Europe in the 1750s. Modernization, then, is the process of social change begun by industrialization. The timeline inside the back cover of this book highlights important events that mark the emergence

Social Change: Modern and Postmodern Societies CHAPTER 16 485

modernity social patterns resulting from industrialization

modernization the process of social change begun by industrialization

THINKING GLOBALLY

A Never-Ending Atomic Disaster

It was just after dawn on March 1, 1954, and the air was already warm on Utrik Island, a small bit of coral and volcanic rock in the South Pacific that is one of the Marshall Islands. The island was home to 159 people, who lived by fishing much as their ancestors had done for centuries. The population knew only a little about the out- side world—a missionary from the United States taught the local children, and two dozen military personnel lived at a small U.S. weather station with an airstrip where a single plane touched down each week.

At 6:45 A.M., the western sky suddenly lit up brighter than anyone had ever seen, and sec- onds later, a rumble like a massive earthquake rolled across the island. Some of the Utrik peo- ple thought the world was coming to an end. Their world, at least as they had known it, had changed forever.

About 160 miles to the west, on Bikini Island, the United States military had just detonated an atomic bomb, a huge device with 1,000 times the power of the bomb used at the end of World War II to destroy the Japanese city of Hiroshima. The enormous blast vaporized the island and sent a massive cloud of dust and radiation into the atmosphere. The military expected the winds to take the cloud north into an open area of the ocean, but the cloud blew east instead. By noon, the radiation cloud had engulfed a Japanese fishing boat ironically called the Lucky Dragon, exposing the twenty-three people on board to a dose of radiation that would eventually sicken or

kill them all. By the end of the afternoon, the deadly cloud spilled across Utrik Island.

The cloud was made up of coral and rock dust, all that was left of Bikini Island. The dust fell softly on Utrik Island, and the children, who remembered pictures of snow shown to them by their mission- ary teacher, ran out to play in the white powder that was piling up everywhere. No one realized that it was contaminated with deadly radiation.

Three-and-one-half days later, the U.S. mili- tary landed planes on Utrik Island and informed all the people that they would have to leave

immediately, taking nothing with them. For three months, the island people were held at another military base, and then they were returned home.

Many of the people who were on the island that fateful morning died young, typically from cancer or other diseases associated with radiation exposure. But even today, those who survived consider themselves and their island poisoned by the radiation, and they believe that the poison will never go away. The radiation may or may not still be in their bodies, but it has worked its way deep into their culture. More than half a century after the bomb exploded, people still talked about the morning that “everything changed.” The damage from this disaster turns out to be much more than medical—it was a social transformation that left the people with a deep belief that they are all sick, that life will never be the same, and that the peo- ple who live on the other side of the world could have prevented the disaster but did not.

WHAT DO YOU THINK?

1. In what sense is a disaster like this one never really over?

2. In what ways did the atomic bomb test change the culture of the Utrik people?

3. What does this account lead us to expect about the long-term consequences of other disasters such as Hurricane Katrina, which damaged much of the Gulf Coast in 2005?

Source: Based on Erikson (2005a).

What social damage do you think was caused by the 1986 explosion and massive radiation leak at the Chernobyl nuclear plant in Ukraine?

Seeing Sociology in Everyday Life

IS B

N 1-

25 6-

36 95

7- 8

of modernity. Table 16–1 provides a summary of change in the United States over the course of the twentieth century.

Peter Berger (1977) identified four major characteristics of mod- ernization:

1. The decline of small, traditional communities. Modernity involves “the progressive weakening, if not destruction, of the . . . relatively cohesive communities in which human beings have found solidarity and meaning throughout most of history” (1977:72). For thousands of years, in the camps of hunters and gatherers and in the rural villages of Europe and North America, people lived in small communities where life revolved around family and neighborhood. Such traditional worlds gave each per- son a well-defined place that, although limiting range of choice, offered a strong sense of identity, belonging, and purpose.

Small, isolated communities still exist in the United States, of course, but they are home to only a tiny percentage of our nation’s people. These days, their isolation is only geographic: Except among those who are extremely poor, cars, telephones, television, and computers give rural families the pulse of the larger society and connect them to the entire world.

2. The expansion of personal choice. People in traditional, prein- dustrial societies view their lives as shaped by forces beyond human control—gods, spirits, fate.As the power of tradition weakens, peo- ple come to see their lives as an unending series of options, a process Berger calls individualization. For instance, many people in the United States choose a particular “lifestyle” (sometimes adopting one after another), showing an openness to change. Indeed, it is a common belief that people should take control of their lives.

3. Increasing social diversity. In preindustrial societies, strong fam- ily ties and powerful religious beliefs enforce conformity and dis- courage diversity and change. Modernization promotes a more rational, scientific worldview as tradition loses its hold and people gain more individual choice. The growth of cities, the expansion of

impersonal bureaucracy, and the social mix of people from various backgrounds combine to encourage diverse beliefs and behavior.

4. Orientation toward the future and a growing awareness of time. Premodern people focus on the past; people in modern societies think more about the future. Modern people are not only forward-looking but also optimistic that new inventions and discoveries will improve their lives.

Modern people organize daily routines down to the very minute. With the introduction of clocks in the late Middle Ages, Europeans began to think not in terms of sunlight and seasons but in terms of hours and minutes. Focused on personal gain, modern people demand precise measurement of time and are likely to agree that “time is money.” Berger points out that one good indicator of a society’s degree of modernization is the share of people who keep track of time by continually glancing at their wristwatches (or nowadays, their cell phones).

Finally, recall that modernization touched off the development of sociology itself. As Chapter 1 (“Sociology: Perspective, Theory, and Method”) explained, the discipline originated in the wake of the Industrial Revolution in Western Europe at a point when social change was proceeding rapidly. Early European and U.S. sociologists tried to analyze the rise of modern society and its consequences, both good and bad, for human beings.

Ferdinand Tönnies: The Loss of Community The German sociologist Ferdinand Tönnies produced a lasting account of modernization in his theory of Gemeinschaft and Gesellschaft (see Chapter 15,“Population, Urbanization, and Environment”). Like Peter Berger, whose work he influenced, Tönnies (1963, orig. 1887) viewed modernization as the progressive loss of Gemeinschaft, or human community. As Tönnies saw it, the Industrial Revolution weakened the

486 CHAPTER 16 Social Change: Modern and Postmodern Societies

Table 16–1 The United States: A Century of Change

1900 2000

National population 76 million 281 million Share living in cities 40% 80% Life expectancy 46 years (men), 48 years (women) 74 years (men), 79 years (women) Median age 22.9 years 35.3 years Average household income $8,000 (in 2000 dollars) $40,000 (in 2000 dollars) Share of income spent on food 43% 15% Share of homes with flush toilets 10% 98% Average number of cars 1 car for every 2,000 households 1.3 cars for every household Divorce rate about 1 in 20 marriages about 8 in 20 marriages Average gallons of petroleum products consumed 34 per person per year 1,100 per person per year

Be sure you understand the four traits of modernization identified by Peter Berger.

Making the Grade Look at the various changes in the United States over the past century as summarized in the table below. In each case, think about how the change affected everyday social life.

Seeing Sociology in Everyday Life

IS B

N 1-256-36957-8

social fabric of family and tradition by introducing a businesslike emphasis on facts, efficiency, and money. European and North American societies gradually became rootless and impersonal as people came to associate with one another mostly on the basis of self- interest—the state Tönnies termed Gesellschaft.

Early in the twentieth century, at least some parts of the United States could be described using Tönnies’s concept of Gemeinschaft. Families that had lived for many generations in small villages and towns were bound together into a hardworking and slowly changing way of life. Telephones (invented in 1876) were rare; not until 1915 could one place a coast-to-coast call (see the time- line inside the back cover of this book). Living without television (introduced commercially in 1933 and not widespread until after 1950), families entertained them- selves, often gathering with friends in the evening to share stories, sorrows, or song. Lacking rapid transportation (Henry Ford’s assembly line began in 1908, but cars became common only after World War II), many people knew little of the world beyond their hometown.

Inevitable tensions and conflicts divided these communities of the past. But according to Tönnies, the traditional spirit of Gemeinschaft meant that people were “essentially united in spite of all separating factors” (1963:65, orig. 1887).

Modernity turns society inside out so that, as Tönnies put it, peo- ple are “essentially separated in spite of uniting factors” (1963:65, orig. 1887). This is the world of Gesellschaft, where, especially in large cities, most people live among strangers and ignore the people they pass on the street. Trust is hard to come by in a mobile and anonymous soci- ety in which people put their personal needs ahead of group loyalty and a majority of adults believe “you can’t be too careful” in dealing with people (NORC, 2009:1811). No wonder researchers conclude that even as we have become more affluent, the social health of modern societies has declined (D. G. Myers, 2000).

CRITICAL REVIEW Tönnies’s theory of Gemeinschaft and Gesellschaft is the most widely cited model of modernization. The theory’s strength lies in its synthesis of various dimensions of change: growing population, the rise of cities, and increasingly impersonal interaction. But modern life, though often impersonal, still has some degree of Gemeinschaft. Even in a world of strangers, modern friendships can be strong and lasting. In addi- tion, some analysts think that Tönnies favored—perhaps even romanticized—traditional societies while overlooking bonds of family and friendship that continue to flourish in modern societies.

CHECK YOUR LEARNING As types of social organi- zation, how do Gemeinschaft and Gesellschaft differ?

Read on mysoclab.com

Emile Durkheim: The Division of Labor The French sociologist Emile Durkheim shared Tönnies’s interest in the important social changes that resulted from the Industrial Revo- lution. For Durkheim (1964a, orig. 1893), modernization was marked by an increasing division of labor, or specialized economic activity. Every member of a traditional society performs more or less the same activities; modern societies function by having people perform highly specific jobs.

Durkheim explained that preindustrial societies are held together by mechanical solidarity, or shared moral sentiments (see Chapter 15). Members of such societies view everyone as basically alike, doing the same work and belonging together. Durkheim’s concept of mechan- ical solidarity is virtually the same as Tönnies’s Gemeinschaft.

With modernization, the division of labor (job specialization) becomes more and more pronounced. To Durkheim, this change means less mechanical solidarity but more of another kind of tie: organic solidarity, mutual dependency between people engaged in specialized work. Put simply, modern societies are held together not by likeness but by difference: All of us must depend on others to meet most of our needs. Organic solidarity corresponds to Tönnies’s concept of Gesellschaft.

Despite obvious similarities in their thinking, Durkheim and Tönnies viewed modernity somewhat differently. To Tönnies, mod- ern Gesellschaft amounted to the loss of social solidarity because peo- ple lose the “natural” and “organic” bonds of the rural village, leaving only the “artificial” and “mechanical” ties of the big city. Durkheim

Social Change: Modern and Postmodern Societies CHAPTER 16 487

George Tooker’s 1950 painting The Subway depicts a common problem of modern life: Weakening social ties and eroding traditions create a generic humanity in which everyone is alike yet each person is an anxious stranger in the midst of others. Source: George Tooker, The Subway, 1950, egg tempera on gesso panel, 18 1/8 × 36 1/8 inches, Whitney Museum of American Art, New York. Purchased with funds from the Juliana Force Purchase Award, 50.23. Photograph © Whitney Museum of American Art

“Bowling Alone: America’s Declining Social Capital” by Robert D. Putnam on mysoclab.com

Read Durkheim’s concepts match up with those of Tönnies, but be sure to get it right: Mechanical solidarity corresponds to Gemeinschaft, and organic solidarity is the same as Gesellschaft.

Making the Grade

IS B

N 1-

25 6-

36 95

7- 8

had a different view of modernity, even reversing Tönnies’s language to bring home the point. Durkheim labeled modern society “organic,” arguing that modern society is no less natural than any other, and he described traditional societies as “mechanical” because they are so regimented. Durkheim viewed modernization not so much as a loss of community as a change from community based on bonds of likeness (kinship and neighborhood) to community based on economic interdependence (the division of labor). Durkheim’s view of modernity is thus both more complex and more positive than Tönnies’s view.

CRITICAL REVIEW Durkheim’s work, which resembles that of Tönnies, is a highly influential analysis of modernity. Of the two, Durkheim was more optimistic; still, he feared that mod- ern societies might become so diverse that they would collapse into anomie, a condition in which society provides little moral guidance to individuals. Living with weak moral norms, modern people can become egocentric, placing their own needs above those of others and finding little purpose in life.

The suicide rate, which Durkheim considered a good index of anomie, did in fact increase in the United States over the course of the twentieth century, and the vast majority of adults report that they see moral questions not in clear terms of right and wrong but as confusing “shades of gray” (NORC, 2009:478). Yet shared norms and values seem strong enough to give most people a sense of meaning and purpose. Whatever the hazards of anomie, most people value the personal freedom modern society gives us.

CHECK YOUR LEARNING Define mechanical solidar- ity and organic solidarity. In his view of the modern world, what makes Durkheim more optimistic than Tönnies?

Max Weber: Rationalization For Max Weber, modernity meant replacing a traditional worldview with a rational way of thinking. In preindustrial societies, tradition acts as a constant brake on social change. To traditional people,“truth” is roughly the same as “what has always been” (1978:36, orig. 1921). To modern people, however, “truth” is the result of rational calcula- tion. Because they value efficiency and have little reverence for the past, modern people adopt social patterns that allow them to achieve their goals.

Echoing Tönnies’s and Durkheim’s claim that industrialization weakens tradition, Weber characterized modern society as “disen- chanted.” The unquestioned truths of an earlier time had been chal- lenged by rational thinking. In short, said Weber, modern society turns away from the gods just as it turns away from the past. Throughout his life, Weber studied various modern “types”—the scientist, the capitalist, the bureaucrat—all of whom share the for- ward-looking, rational, and detached worldview that he believed was coming to dominate humanity. Go to mysoclab.com

CRITICAL REVIEW Compared with Tönnies and espe- cially Durkheim, Weber was very critical of modern society. He knew that science could produce technological and organiza- tional wonders, yet he worried that science was carrying us away

488 CHAPTER 16 Social Change: Modern and Postmodern Societies

In traditional societies, such as Amish communities in the United States, everyone does much the same work. These societies are held together by strong moral beliefs. Modern societies, illustrated by urban areas in this country, are held together by a system of production in which people perform specialized work and rely on one another.

division of labor (p. 487) specialized economic activity

anomie a condition in which society provides little moral guidance to individuals

Go to the Multimedia Library at mysoclab.com to hear author John Macionis discuss “What Is Distinctive about the Modern World?”

IS B

N 1-256-36957-8

from more basic questions about the meaning and purpose of human existence. Weber feared that rationalization, especially in bureaucracies, would erode the human spirit with endless rules and regulations.

CHECK YOUR LEARNING What did Weber mean by describing the modern world as “disenchanted”? In what ways are scientists, capitalists, and bureaucrats all “disenchanted”?

Some of Weber’s critics think that the alienation Weber attrib- uted to bureaucracy actually stemmed from social inequality. This issue leads us to the ideas of Karl Marx.

Karl Marx: Capitalism For Karl Marx, modern society was synonymous with capitalism; he saw the Industrial Revolution primarily as a capitalist revolution. Marx traced the emergence of the bourgeoisie in medieval Europe to the expansion of commerce. The bourgeoisie gradually displaced the feudal aristocracy as the Industrial Revolution gave it control of a powerful new productive system.

Marx agreed that modernity weakened small communities (as described by Tönnies), increased the division of labor (as noted by Durkheim), and encouraged a rational worldview (as Weber claimed). But he saw these simply as conditions necessary for capi- talism to flourish. According to Marx, capitalism draws population away from farms and small towns into an ever-expanding market system centered in the cities; specialization is needed for efficient

factories; and rationality is illustrated by the capitalists’ endless pur- suit of profit.

Earlier chapters have painted Marx as a spirited critic of cap- italist society, but his vision of modernity also includes a good bit of optimism. Unlike Weber, who viewed modern society as an “iron cage” of bureaucracy from which there was no escape, Marx believed that social conflict in capitalist societies would sow the seeds of revolutionary change, leading to an egalitarian social- ism. Such a society, as he saw it, would harness the wonders of industrial technology to enrich people’s lives and rid the world of social classes, the source of conflict and so much suffering. Although Marx’s evaluation of modern capitalist society was highly negative, he imagined a future of human freedom, creativity, and community.

CRITICAL REVIEW Marx’s theory of modernization is a complex theory of capitalism. But he underestimated the domi- nance of bureaucracy in shaping modern societies. In socialist societies, in particular, the stifling effects of bureaucracy have turned out to be as bad as, or even worse than, the dehumaniz- ing aspects of capitalism. The upheavals in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union in the 1990s revealed the depth of pop- ular opposition to oppressive state bureaucracies.

CHECK YOUR LEARNING Of the four theorists just discussed—Tönnies, Durkheim, Weber, and Marx—who comes across as the most optimistic about modern society? Who was the most pessimistic? Explain your choices.

Social Change: Modern and Postmodern Societies CHAPTER 16 489

OUT

Max Weber maintained that the distinctive character of modern society was its rational worldview. Virtually all of Weber’s work on modernity centered on types of people he considered typical of their age: the scientist, the capitalist, and the bureaucrat. Each is rational to the core: The scientist is committed to the orderly discovery of truth, the capitalist to the orderly pursuit of profit, and the bureaucrat to orderly conformity to a system of rules.

Be sure you see what, from Weber’s point of view, the scientist, the capitalist, and the bureaucrat (all pictured below) have in common.

Making the Grade Marx claimed capitalism was the foundation of modern society; Weber claimed that capitalism (along with science and bureaucracy) rests on a more basic foundation—rationality.

Making the Grade

IS B

N 1-

25 6-

36 95

7- 8

Structural-Functional Analysis: Modernity as Mass Society

November 11, on Interstate 275. From the car window, we see BP and Sunoco gas stations, a Kmart and a Walmart, an AmeriSuites hotel, a Bob Evans, a Chi- Chi’s Mexican restaurant, and a McDonald’s. This road

happens to circle Cincinnati, Ohio. But it could be in Boston, Saint Louis, Denver, San Diego, or almost anywhere else in the United States.

The rise of modernity is a complex process involving many dimensions of change, described in earlier chapters and reviewed here in the Summing Up table. How can we make sense of so many changes going on at once? Sociologists have two broad explanations of modern society, one guided by the structural-functional approach and the other based on social-conflict theory.

The first explanation, guided by the structural-functional approach and drawing on the ideas of Tönnies, Durkheim, and Weber, understands modernity as the emergence of a mass society (Kornhauser, 1959; Nisbet, 1969; Berger, Berger, & Kellner, 1974; Pearson, 1993). A mass society is a society in which prosperity and bureaucracy have weakened traditional social ties. A mass society is productive; on average, people have more income than ever. At the same time, it is marked by weak kinship and impersonal neighbor- hoods, leaving individuals to feel socially isolated. Although many people have material plenty, they are spiritually weak and often expe- rience moral uncertainty about how to live.

The Mass Scale of Modern Life Mass-society theory argues, first, that the scale of modern life has greatly increased. Before the Industrial Revolution, Europe and North America formed a mosaic of rural villages and small towns. In these local communities, which inspired Tönnies’s concept of Gemeinschaft, people lived out their lives surrounded by kin and guided by a shared heritage. Gossip was an informal yet highly effective way of ensuring conformity to community standards. Such small communities toler- ated little social diversity—the state of mechanical solidarity described by Durkheim.

For example, before 1690, English law demanded that everyone participate regularly in the Christian ritual of Holy Communion (Laslett, 1984). On the North American continent, only Rhode Island among the New England colonies tolerated any religious dissent. Because social differences were repressed in favor of conformity to established norms, subcultures and countercultures were few, and change proceeded slowly.

Increasing population, the growth of cities, and specialized eco- nomic activity driven by the Industrial Revolution gradually altered this pattern. People came to know one another by their jobs (for example, as “the doctor” or “the bank clerk”) rather than by their kin- ship group or hometown. People looked on most others simply as strangers. The face-to-face communication of the village was eventu- ally replaced by the impersonal mass media: newspapers, radio, tele- vision, and computer networks. Large organizations steadily assumed more and more responsibility for the daily needs that had once been fulfilled by family, friends, and neighbors; public education drew more and more people to schools; police, lawyers, and courts supervised a formal criminal justice system. Even charity became the work of face- less bureaucrats working for various social welfare agencies.

Geographic mobility, mass communication, and exposure to diverse ways of life all weaken traditional values. People become more tolerant of social diversity, defending individual rights and freedom of choice. Treating people differently because of their race, sex, or religion comes to be defined as backward and unjust. In the process, minorities at the margins of society gain greater power and broader participation in public life. The election of Barack Obama—an African American—to the highest office in the United States is surely one indicator that ours is now a modern society (West, 2008).

The mass media give rise to a national culture that washes over the traditional differences that used to set off one region from another. As one analyst put it, “Even in Baton Rouge, La., the local kids don’t say ‘y’all’ anymore; they say ‘you guys’ just like on TV” (Gibbs, 2000:42). Mass-society theorists fear that the transformation of people of various backgrounds into a generic mass may end up dehumanizing everyone.

The Ever-Expanding State In the small-scale preindustrial societies of Europe, government amounted to little more than a local noble. A royal family formally reigned over an entire nation, but in the absence of swift transporta- tion and efficient communication, even absolute monarchs had far less power than today’s political leaders.

As technological innovation allowed government to expand, the centralized state grew in size and importance. At the time of independ- ence, the U.S. government was a tiny organization, its primary function being national defense. Since then, government has assumed responsi- bility for more and more areas of social life: schooling, regulating wages and working conditions, establishing standards for products of all sorts, and providing financial assistance to the elderly, the ill, and the unem- ployed. To pay for such programs, taxes have soared: Today’s average worker in the United States labors more than four months each year just to pay for the broad array of services the government provides.

In a mass society, power resides in large bureaucracies, leaving people in local communities with little control over their lives. For

490 CHAPTER 16 Social Change: Modern and Postmodern Societies

mass society a society in which prosperity and bureaucracy have weakened traditional social ties

class society (p. 492) a capitalist society with pronounced social stratification

Identify five examples of “mass culture” that are the same throughout the United States. Name five more that differ from region to region.

Seeing Sociology in Everyday Life

IS B

N 1-256-36957-8

example, state officials mandate that local schools must meet educa- tional standards, local products must be government-certified, and every citizen must maintain extensive tax records. Although such regulations may protect people and enhance social equality, they also force us to deal more and more with nameless officials in distant and often unresponsive bureaucracies, and they undermine the autonomy of families and local communities.

CRITICAL REVIEW The growing scale of modern life cer- tainly has positive aspects, but only at the cost of our cultural her- itage. Modern societies increase individual rights, have greater tolerance of social differences, and raise living standards (Ingle- hart & Baker, 2000). But they are prone to what Weber feared most—excessive bureaucracy—as well as to Tönnies’s self- centeredness and Durkheim’s anomie. The size, complexity, and

Social Change: Modern and Postmodern Societies CHAPTER 16 491

SUMMING UP

Traditional and Modern Societies: The Big Picture

Elements of Society Traditional Societies Modern Societies

Cultural Patterns

Values

Norms

Time orientation

Technology

Homogeneous; sacred character; few subcultures and countercultures

Great moral significance; little tolerance of diversity

Present linked to past

Preindustrial; human and animal energy

Heterogeneous; secular character; many subcultures and countercultures

Variable moral significance; high tolerance of diversity

Present linked to future

Industrial; advanced energy sources

Social Structure

Status and role

Relationships

Communication

Social control

Social stratification

Gender patterns

Settlement patterns

Few statuses, most ascribed; few specialized roles

Typically primary; little anonymity or privacy

Face to face

Informal gossip

Rigid patterns of social inequality; little mobility

Pronounced patriarchy; women’s lives centered on the home

Small-scale; population typically small and widely dispersed in rural villages and small towns

Many statuses, some ascribed and some achieved; many specialized roles

Typically secondary; much anonymity and privacy

Face-to-face communication supplemented by mass media

Formal police and legal system

Fluid patterns of social inequality; high mobility

Declining patriarchy; increasing share of women work in the paid labor force

Large-scale; population typically large and concentrated in cities

Social Institutions

Economy

State

Family

Religion

Education

Health

Based on agriculture; much manufacturing in the home; little white- collar work

Small-scale government; little state intervention in society

Extended family as the primary means of socialization and economic production

Religion guides worldview; little religious pluralism

Formal schooling limited to elites

High birth and death rates; short life expectancy because of low stan- dard of living and simple medical technology

Based on industrial mass production; factories become centers of production; increasing white-collar work

Large-scale government; much state intervention in society

Nuclear family still has some socialization functions but is more a unit of consumption than of production

Religion weakens with the rise of science; extensive religious pluralism

Basic schooling becomes universal, with growing share of people receiving advanced education

Low birth and death rates; longer life expectancy because of higher standard of living and sophisticated medical technology

Social Change Slow; change evident over many generations Rapid; change evident within a single generation

This table is a good summary of trends that define our modern society. It also reviews much of what you have studied in earlier chapters.

Making the Grade As you read about mass society theory, keep in mind the theories of Tönnies, Durkheim, and Weber on which it is based.

Making the Grade

IS B

N 1-

25 6-

36 95

7- 8

tolerance of diversity of modern societies all but doom traditional values and families, leaving individuals isolated, powerless, and materialistic. As Chapter 12 (“Economics and Politics”) noted, voter apathy is a serious problem in the United States. But should we be surprised that individuals in vast, impersonal societies such as ours end up thinking that no one person can make much of a difference?

Critics sometimes say that mass-society theory romanticizes the past. They remind us that many people in the small towns of our past were eager to set out for a better standard of living in cities. This approach also ignores problems of social inequality. Critics say mass-society theory attracts social and economic conservatives who defend conventional morality and are indif- ferent to the historical inequality of women and other minorities.

CHECK YOUR LEARNING In your own words, state the mass-society analysis of modernity.

Social-Conflict Analysis: Modernity as Class Society The second explanation of modernity derives mostly from the ideas of Karl Marx. From a social-conflict perspective, modernity takes the form of a class society, a capitalist society with pronounced social strat- ification. While agreeing that modern societies have expanded to a

mass scale, this approach views the heart of modernization as an expanding capitalist economy, marked by inequality (Habermas, 1970; Harrington, 1984; Buechler, 2000).

Capitalism Class-society theory follows Marx in claiming that the increasing scale of social life in modern times has resulted from the growth and greed unleashed by capitalism. Because a capitalist economy pursues ever-greater profits, both production and consumption steadily increase.

According to Marx, capitalism rests on “naked self-interest” (Marx & Engels, 1972:337, orig. 1848). This self-centeredness weak- ens the social ties that once united small communities. Capitalism also treats people as commodities: a source of labor and a market for capitalist products.

Capitalism supports science not just as the key to greater produc- tivity but also as an ideology that justifies the status quo. Modern societies encourage people to view human well-being as a technical puzzle that can be solved by engineers and other scientific experts rather than through the pursuit of social justice. For example, a cap- italist culture seeks to improve health through advances in scientific medicine rather than by eliminating poverty, despite the fact that poverty is a core cause of poor health.

Businesses also raise the banner of scientific logic, trying to increase profits through greater efficiency. As Chapter 12 (“Economics and Politics”) explained, capitalist cor- porations have reached enormous size and control unimaginable wealth as a result of global expansion. From the class-society point of view, the expanding scale of life is less a function of Gesellschaft than the inevitable and destructive consequence of capitalism.

Persistent Inequality Modernity has gradually worn away some of the rigid categories that divided preindustrial societies. But class- society theory maintains that elites persist in the form of capitalist millionaires instead of nobles born to wealth and power. In the United States, we may have no hereditary monarchy, but the richest 5 percent of the population controls about 60 percent of all privately held property (Keister, 2005; Wolff, 2009).

What of the state? Mass-society theorists argue that the state works to increase equality and fight social problems. Marx disagreed; he doubted that the state could accomplish more than minor reforms because, as he saw it, real power lies in the hands of the capital- ists who control the economy. Other class-society

492 CHAPTER 16 Social Change: Modern and Postmodern Societies

Social-conflict theory sees modernity not as an impersonal mass society but as an unequal class society in which some categories of people are second-class citizens. This Arizona family, like many Native Americans, lives on a reservation, where poverty is widespread and many trailer homes do not have electricity or running water.

Mass-society theory is critical of the expansion of the modern state, claiming that large bureaucracies encourage dehumanization. Class-society theory takes a more positive view of the expanding state, claiming that it helps reduce social inequality.

Making the Grade Mass society theory claims the problem with modern society is that it has become too big and impersonal; class society theory claims the problem with modern society is that it is too unequal.

Making the Grade

IS B

N 1-256-36957-8

theorists add that to the extent that working people and minorities do enjoy greater political rights and a higher standard of living today, these changes were the result of political struggle, not government goodwill. Despite our pretensions of democracy, they conclude, most people are powerless in the face of wealthy elites.

CRITICAL REVIEW Class-society theory dismisses Durkheim’s argument that people in modern societies suffer from anomie, claiming instead that most people deal with alienation and powerlessness. Not surprisingly, the class-society interpre- tation of modernity enjoys widespread support among liberals and radicals who favor greater equality and seek extensive reg- ulation (or abolition) of the capitalist marketplace.

A basic criticism of class-society theory is that it overlooks the increasing prosperity of modern societies and the fact that discrimination based on race, ethnicity, religion, and gender is now illegal and is widely regarded as a social problem. In addi- tion, most people in the United States do not want an egalitar- ian society; they prefer a system of unequal rewards that reflects personal differences in talent and effort.

Based on socialism’s failure to generate a high overall stan- dard of living, few observers think that a centralized economy would cure the ills of modernity. Many other problems in the United States—including unemployment, industrial pollution, and unresponsive government—are also found in socialist nations.

CHECK YOUR LEARNING In your own words, state the class-society analysis of modernity. What are several criti- cisms of it?

The Summing Up table compares views of modern society offered by mass-society theory and class-society theory. Mass-soci- ety theory focuses on the increasing impersonality of social life and the growth of government; class-society theory stresses the expansion of capitalism and the persistence of inequality.

Modernity and the Individual Both mass- and class-society theories look at the broad patterns of change since the Industrial Revolution. From these macro-level approaches, we can also draw micro-level insights into how moder- nity shapes individual lives.

Mass Society: Problems of Identity Modernity freed individuals from the small, tightly knit communities of the past. Most members of modern societies have the privacy and freedom to express their individuality. However, mass-society theory suggests that so much social diversity, widespread isolation, and rapid social change make it difficult for many people to establish any coher- ent identity at all (Wheelis, 1958; Berger, Berger, & Kellner, 1974).

Chapter 3 (“Socialization: From Infancy to Old Age”) explained that people’s personalities are mostly a product of their social expe- riences. The small, homogeneous, and slowly changing societies of the past provided a firm, if narrow, foundation for building a per- sonal identity. Even today, Amish and Mennonite communities that flourish in the United States teach young men and women “correct” ways to think and behave. Not everyone born into an Amish commu- nity can tolerate such rigid demands for conformity, but most mem- bers establish a well-integrated and satisfying personal identity (Kraybill & Olshan, 1994; Kraybill & Hurd, 2006).

Mass societies are quite another story. Socially diverse and rap- idly changing, they offer only shifting sands on which to build a per- sonal identity. Left to make many life decisions on their own, people—especially those with greater wealth—face a confusing range of options. The freedom to choose has little value without standards to guide the selection process; in a tolerant mass society, people may find little reason to choose one path over another. As a result, many people shuttle from one identity to another, changing their lifestyles, relationships, and even religions in search of an elusive “true self.” Given the widespread relativism of modern societies, people without

Social Change: Modern and Postmodern Societies CHAPTER 16 493

SUMMING UP

Two Interpretations of Modernity

Mass Society Class Society

Process of modernization

Industrialization; growth of bureaucracy Rise of capitalism

Effects of modernization

Increasing scale of life; rise of the state and other formal organizations Expansion of the capitalist economy; persistence of social inequality

Both mass- and class-society theories are critical of modernity: the first because of what is lost (traditional social ties), the second because of what remains (persistent social inequality).

Making the Grade Have you ever felt difficulty deciding “who you are”? Do you try to be a different person in different settings? If you answer “yes” to such questions, how might you link such experiences to modernity?

Seeing Sociology in Everyday Life

IS B

N 1-

25 6-

36 95

7- 8

a moral compass lack the security and certainty once provided by tradition.

To David Riesman (1970, orig. 1950), modernization brings changes in social character, personality patterns common to members of a particular society. Preindustrial societies promote what Riesman calls tradition-directedness, rigid conformity to time-honored ways of living. Members of such societies model their lives on those of their ancestors, so that “living the good life” amounts to “doing what peo- ple have always done.”

Tradition-directedness corresponds to Tönnies’s Gemeinschaft and Durkheim’s mechanical solidarity. Culturally conservative, tra- dition-directed people think and act alike. Unlike the conformity often found in modern societies, the uniformity of tradition-direct- edness is not an effort to imitate a popular celebrity or follow the latest trend. Instead, people are alike because they all draw on the same solid cultural foundation. Amish women and men exemplify tradi- tion-directedness; in the Amish culture, tradition ties everyone to ancestors and descendants in an unbroken chain of righteous living.

Members of diverse and rapidly changing societies define a tra- dition-directed personality as deviant because it seems so rigid. Mod- ern people prize personal flexibility, the capacity to adapt, and sensitivity to others. Riesman calls this type of social character other- directedness, openness to the latest trends and fashions, often expressed by imitating others. Because their socialization occurs in societies that are continuously in flux, other-directed people develop fluid identi- ties marked by superficiality, inconsistency, and change. They try on different “selves” almost like new clothing, seek out role models, and engage in varied performances as they move from setting to setting (Goffman, 1959). In a traditional society, such “shiftiness” marks a person as untrustworthy, but in a changing, modern society, the chameleonlike ability to fit in almost virtually anywhere is very useful.

In societies that value the up-to-date rather than the traditional, people look to others for approval, using members of their own generation rather than elders as role models. Peer pressure can be irresistible to people without strong standards to guide them. Our society urges people to be true to themselves, but when social sur- roundings change so rapidly, how can people develop the self to which they should be true? This problem lies at the root of the iden- tity crisis so widespread in industrial societies today. “Who am I?” is a nagging question that many of us struggle to answer. In truth, this problem is not so much us as the inherently unstable mass society in which we live.

Class Society: Problems of Powerlessness Class-society theory paints a different picture of modernity’s effects on individuals. This approach maintains that persistent inequality under-

mines modern society’s promise of individual freedom. For some peo- ple, modernity serves up great privilege, but for many others, every- day life means coping with economic uncertainty and a gnawing sense of powerlessness (K. S. Newman, 1993; Ehrenreich, 2001).

For racial and ethnic minorities, the problem of relative disad- vantage looms even larger. Similarly, although women participate more broadly in modern societies, they continue to run up against traditional barriers of sexism. This approach rejects mass-society theory’s claim that people suffer from too much freedom; accord- ing to class-society theory, our society still denies a majority of peo- ple full participation in social life.

As Chapter 9 (“Global Stratification”) explained, the expanding scope of world capitalism has placed more of Earth’s population under the influence of multinational corporations. As a result, 80 percent of the world’s income is concentrated in high-income nations, where just 23 percent of its people live. Is it any wonder, class-society theorists ask, that people in poor nations seek greater power to shape their own lives?

The problem of widespread powerlessness led Herbert Marcuse (1964) to challenge Max Weber’s claim that modern society is rational. Marcuse condemned modern society as irrational for failing to meet the needs of so many people. Although modern capitalist societies produce unparalleled wealth, poverty remains the daily plight of more than 1 billion people. Marcuse added that technological advances fur- ther reduce people’s control over their own lives. The advent of high technology has generally conferred a great deal of power on a core of specialists—not the majority of people—who now dominate discus- sion of when to go to war, what our energy policy should be, and how people should pay for health care. Countering the popular view that technology solves the world’s problems, Marcuse believed that science causes them. In sum, class-society theory asserts that people suffer because modern societies have concentrated both wealth and power in the hands of a privileged few.

Modernity and Progress In modern societies, most people expect and applaud social change. We link modernity to the idea of progress (from the Latin, meaning “moving forward”), a state of continual improvement. We equate sta- bility with stagnation.

Given our bias in favor of change, members of our society tend to regard traditional cultures as backward. But change, particularly toward material affluence, is a mixed blessing. As the Thinking Globally box on page 496 shows, social change is too complex sim- ply to equate with progress.

Even getting rich has both advantages and disadvantages, as the cases of the Kaiapo and Gullah show. Historically, among people in

494 CHAPTER 16 Social Change: Modern and Postmodern Societies

social character personality patterns common to members of a particular society

tradition-directedness rigid conformity to time-honored ways of living

other-directedness openness to the latest trends and fashions, often expressed by imitating others

Riesman’s tradition-directedness corresponds to Tönnies’s Gemeinschaft and Durkheim’s mechanical solidarity. Other- directedness is linked to Gesellschaft and organic solidarity.

Making the Grade

IS B

N 1-256-36957-8

the United States, a rising standard of living has made lives longer and more comfortable. At the same time, many people wonder whether today’s routines are too stressful, with families often having little time to relax or to spend time together. Perhaps this is why, in the United States, measures of happiness have declined (D. G. Myers, 2000; Inglehart, Welzel, & Foa, 2009).

Science, too, has its pluses and minuses. People in the United States are more confident than people living in most other indus- trial societies that science improves our everyday lives (Inglehart & Welzel, 2010). But surveys also show that many adults in the United States feel that science “makes our way of life change too fast” (NORC, 2009:1329).

New technology has always sparked controversy. Just over a cen- tury ago, the introduction of automobiles and telephones allowed more rapid transportation and more efficient communication, improving people’s lives. At the same time, such technology also weakened traditional attachments to hometowns and even to families. Today, people might wonder whether computer technology will do the same thing: giving us access to people around the world but shielding us from the community right outside our doors; providing more information than ever before but in the process threatening personal privacy. In short, we all realize that social change comes faster all the time, but we may disagree about whether a particular change is good or bad for society.

Modernity: Global Variation

October 1 , Kobe, Japan. Riding the computer- controlled monorail high above the streets of Kobe or the 200-mile-per-hour bullet train to Tokyo, we see Japan as the society of the future, in love with high

technology. Yet the Japanese remain strikingly traditional in other respects: Few corporate executives and almost no politi- cians are women, young people still show seniors great respect, and public orderliness contrasts with the relative chaos of many U.S. cities.

Japan is a nation both traditional and modern. This contradiction reminds us that although it is useful to contrast traditional and modern social patterns, the old and the new often coexist in unexpected ways. In the People’s Republic of China, ancient Confucian principles are mixed with contemporary socialist thinking. In Saudi Arabia and Qatar, a love of the latest modern technology is mixed with respect for the ancient principles of Islam. Likewise, in Mexico and much of Latin America, people observe centuries-old Christian rituals even as they struggle to move ahead economically. In short, although we may think of tradition and modernity as opposites, combinations of traditional and modern are far from unusual, and they are found throughout the world.

Social Change: Modern and Postmodern Societies CHAPTER 16 495

Mass-society theory relates feelings of anxiety and lack of meaning in the modern world to rapid social change that washes away tradition. This notion of modern emptiness is captured in the photo at the left. Class-society theory, by contrast, ties such feelings to social inequality, by which some categories of people are made into second-class citizens (or not made citizens at all), an idea expressed in the photo at the right.

In a sense, mass-society theory claims that modern people have too much freedom and choice; class-society theory claims that we have too little.

Making the Grade In 1970, Alvin Toffler coined the phrase “future shock” to describe the effect of social change that comes so rapidly that it overwhelms us. Do you think the pace of change has become overwhelming? Does our world need more change, or do we have too much already? Explain your answers.

Seeing Sociology in Everyday Life

IS B

N 1-

25 6-

36 95

7- 8

Postmodernity If modernity was the product of the Industrial Revolution, could the Information Revolution be creating a postmodern era? A number of scholars think so, and they use the term postmodernity to refer to social patterns characteristic of postindustrial societies.

Precisely what postmodernism is remains a matter of debate. The term has been used for decades in literary, philosophical, and even architectural circles. It has moved into sociology on a wave of social criticism that has been building since the spread of left-leaning politics in the 1960s. Although there are many variations of post- modern thinking, all share the following five themes (Hall & Neitz, 1993; Inglehart, 1997; Rudel & Gerson, 1999):

1. In important respects, modernity has failed. The promise of modernity was a life free from want. As postmodernist critics see it, however, the twentieth century was unsuccessful in solving

social problems such as poverty because many people still lack financial security.

2. The bright light of“progress”is fading. Modern people look to the future expecting their lives to improve in significant ways. Members (and even leaders) of a postmodern society are less confident about what the future holds. The strong optimism that carried society into the modern era more than a century ago has given way to widespread pessimism, especially in recent years due to the weak economy.

3. Science no longer holds the answers. The defining trait of the modern era was a scientific outlook and a confident belief that technology would make life better. But postmodern critics argue that science has failed to solve many old problems (such as poor health) and has even created new problems (such as air and water pollution and declining natural resources).

Postmodernist thinkers discredit science, claiming that it implies a singular truth. On the contrary, they maintain, there

496 CHAPTER 16 Social Change: Modern and Postmodern Societies

THINKING GLOBALLY

Does “Modernity” Mean “Progress”? The Kaiapo of the Amazon and the Gullah of Georgia

The firelight flickers in the gathering darkness. Chief Kanhonk sits, as he has done at the end of the day for many years, ready to begin an evening of animated talk and storytelling (Simons, 2007). This is the hour when the Kaiapo, a small society in Brazil’s lush Amazon region, celebrate their heritage. Because the Kaiapo are a traditional people with no written language, the elders rely on evenings by the fire to pass along their culture to their children and grandchildren. In the past, evenings like this have been filled with tales of brave Kaiapo warriors fighting off Portuguese traders in pursuit of slaves and gold.

But as the minutes pass, just a few older villagers assemble for the evening ritual. “It is the Big Ghost,” one man grumbles, explaining the poor turnout. The “Big Ghost” has indeed descended on them; its bluish glow spills from win- dows throughout the village. The Kaiapo children—and many adults as well—are watching sitcoms on television. Buying a television and a satellite dish several years ago has had consequences far greater than anyone imagined. In the

end, what their enemies failed to do with guns, the Kaiapo may well do to themselves with prime-time programming.

The Kaiapo are among the 230,000 native peoples who inhabit Brazil. They stand out because of their striking body paint and ornate ceremonial dress. During the 1980s, they became rich from gold mining and harvesting mahogany trees. Now they must decide if their newfound fortune is a blessing or a curse.

To some, affluence means the opportunity to learn about the outside world through travel and television. Others, like Chief Kanhonk, are not so sure. Sitting by the fire, he thinks aloud, “I have been saying that people must buy useful things like knives and fishing hooks. Television does not fill the stomach. It only shows our children and grandchildren white people’s things.” Bebtopup, the oldest priest, nods in agreement: “The night is the time the old people teach the young people.

Television has stolen the night” (Simons, 2007:522).

Far to the north, half an hour by ferry from the coast of Georgia, lies the swampy island community of Hog Ham- mock. The seventy African American residents of the island today trace their ancestry back to the first slaves who settled here in 1802.

Walking past the brightly painted houses that stand among yellow pine trees draped with Spanish moss, a visi- tor can easily feel transported back in time. The local people, known as Gullahs (or in some places, Geechees), speak a

The importance of a global perspective is seeing that “tradition” and “modernity” are not simply opposites but are often found in unexpected combinations in societies around the world.

Making the Grade

postmodernity social patterns characteristic of postindustrial societies

IS B

N 1-256-36957-8

is no one truth. This means that objective reality does not exist; rather, many realities result from social construction.

4. Cultural debates are intensifying. Many people have all the material things they really need, which allows ideas to take on more importance. In this sense, postmodernity is also a postmaterialist era in which issues such as social justice, the envi- ronment, and animal rights command more and more public attention.

5. Social institutions are changing. Just as industrialization brought sweeping transformation to social institutions, the rise of postindustrial society is remaking society all over again. For example, the Industrial Revolution placed material things at the center of productive life; the Information Revolution emphasizes ideas. Similarly, the postmodern family no longer conforms to any one pattern; on the contrary, individuals are choosing among many family forms.

CRITICAL REVIEW Analysts who claim that the United States and other high-income nations are entering a postmodern era criticize modernity for failing to meet human needs. In defense of modernity, there have been marked increases in longevity and living standards over the past century. Even if we were to accept postmodernist views that science is bankrupt and progress is a sham, what are the alternatives?

CHECK YOUR LEARNING In your own words, state the defining characteristics of a postmodern society.

Looking Ahead: Modernization and Our Global Future Imagine the entire world’s population reduced to a single village of 1,000 people.About 230 residents of this “global village”are from high-income countries. Another 196 people are so poor that their lives are at risk.

Social Change: Modern and Postmodern Societies CHAPTER 16 497

creole, a mixture of English and West African languages. They fish, living much the same as they have for hundreds of years.

But the future of this way of life is now in doubt. Few young people who are raised in Hog Hammock can find work; beyond fishing and making traditional crafts, there are simply no jobs to do. “We have been here nine generations and we are still here,” says one local. Then, referring to the nineteen children who now live on the island, she adds, “It’s not that they don’t want to be here; it’s that there’s nothing here for them—they need to have jobs” (Curry, 2001:41).

Just as important, with people on the main- land looking for waterside homes for vacations or year-round living, the island is now becoming prime real estate. Not long ago, one larger house went up for sale and the community was shocked to learn of an asking price over $1 mil- lion. The locals know only too well that higher property values will mean high taxes that few can afford to pay. In short, Hog Hammock is likely to become another Hilton Head, once a Gullah community on the South Carolina coast that is now home to well-to-do people from the mainland.

The odds are that before long, the people of Hog Hammock will be selling their homes and moving inland. But few people are happy at the thought of selling out, even for a good price. On the contrary, moving away will mean the end of their cultural heritage.

The stories of the Kaiapo and the people of Hog Hammock show us that change is not a simple path toward “progress.” These peo- ple may be moving toward modernity, but this process will have both positive and negative consequences. In the end, both groups of people may enjoy a higher standard of living with better shelter, more clothing, and new technology. But their newfound affluence will come at the price of their traditions. The drama of these people is now being played out around the world as more and more traditional cultures are being lured away from their her- itage by the affluence and materialism of rich societies.

WHAT DO YOU THINK?

1. Why is social change both a winning and a losing proposition for traditional people?

2. Do the changes described here improve the lives of the Kaiapo? What about the Gullah community?

3. Do traditional people have any choice about becoming modern? Explain your view.

Just as the Industrial Revolution marks the onset of modernity, the new postindustrial economy (or Information Revolution) marks the onset of postmodernity.

Making the Grade An important sociological insight is that social change always has both positive and negative consequences, so it is simplistic to equate change with “progress.”

Making the Grade

IS B

N 1-

25 6-

36 95

7- 8

The tragic plight of the world’s poor shows that some desperately needed change has not yet occurred. Chapter 9 (“Global Stratifica- tion”) presented two competing views of why 1 billion people around the world are so poor. Modernization theory claims that in the past, the entire world was poor and that technological change, especially the Industrial Revolution, enhanced human productivity and raised liv- ing standards in many nations. From this point of view, the solution to global poverty is to promote technological development and mar- ket economies around the world.

For reasons suggested earlier, however, global modernization may be difficult. Recall that David Riesman portrayed preindustrial people as tradition-directed and likely to resist change. So modern- ization theorists claim that rich nations should help poor countries grow economically. Industrial nations can speed development by exporting technology to poor regions, welcoming students from these countries, and providing foreign aid to stimulate economic growth.

The review of modernization theory in Chapter 9 points to some success for these policies in Latin America and more dramatic results in the small Asian countries of Taiwan, South Korea, and Singapore and in Hong Kong (part of the People’s Republic of China). But jump-starting development in the poorest countries of the world poses greater challenges. Even where dramatic change has occurred, modernization involves a trade-off. Traditional people, such as Brazil’s Kaiapo, may gain wealth through economic development, but only at the cost of losing their traditional identity and values as they are drawn into a global “McCulture,” which is based on West- ern materialism, pop music, trendy clothes, and fast food. One Brazil- ian anthropologist expressed optimism about the future of the Kaiapo: “At least they quickly understood the consequences of watch- ing television. . . . Now [they] can make a choice” (Simons, 2007:523).

But not everyone thinks that modernization is really an option. According to a second approach to global stratification, dependency

498 CHAPTER 16 Social Change: Modern and Postmodern Societies

SEEING SOCIOLOGY IN EVERYDAY LIFE

on. The attack continued for more than thirty minutes until Genovese lay dead in her doorway. The police never identified her killer, and the fol- low-up investigation revealed a stunning fact:

Not one of the dozens of neighbors who wit- nessed the attack on Kitty Genovese went to her aid or even called the police.

Decades after this tragic event, we still confront the question of what we owe others.

As members of a modern society, we prize our individual rights and personal privacy, but we some- times withdraw from public respon- sibility and turn a cold shoulder to people in need. When a cry for help is met by indifference, have we pushed our modern idea of personal freedom too far? In a society of expanding individual rights, can we keep a sense of human community?

These questions highlight the tension between traditional and modern social systems, which is evident in the writings of all the sociologists discussed in this chap- ter. Tönnies, Durkheim, and others concluded that in some respects, traditional community and modern individualism don’t mix. That is, society can unite its members as a

Personal Freedom and Social Responsibility: Can We Have It Both Ways?

SAMUEL: I feel that being free is the most impor- tant thing. Let me do what I want! SANJI: But if everyone felt that way, what would the world be like? DOREEN: Isn’t there a way to be true to our- selves and also take account of other people?

One issue we all have to work out is making personal decisions that take proper account of other peo- ple. But what, exactly, do we owe others? To see the problem, con- sider an event that took place in New York in 1964.

Shortly after midnight on a crisp March evening, Kitty Genovese drove into the parking lot of her apartment complex. She turned off the engine, locked the car doors, and headed across the blacktop toward the entrance to her building. Out of nowhere, a man holding a knife lunged at her, and as she screamed in terror and pain, he stabbed her repeatedly. Windows opened above as curious neighbors looked down to see what was going

In today’s world, people can find new ways to express age-old virtues such as extending a helping hand to their neighbors in need. In the wake of Hurricane Katrina, thousands of college students from across the country converged on New Orleans to help repair the damage to the stricken city. Are there opportunities for you to get involved in your own community?

Do you think there is too much of a “me first” attitude in today’s world? Explain your view.

Seeing Sociology in Everyday Life

Does the balance between individual freedom and personal responsibility differ for men and women? If so, how, and why?

Seeing Sociology in Everyday Life

IS B

N 1-256-36957-8

Social Change: Modern and Postmodern Societies CHAPTER 16 499

theory, today’s poor societies have little ability to modernize, even if they want to. From this point of view, the major barrier to economic development is not traditionalism but global domination by rich capitalist societies.

Dependency theory asserts that rich nations achieved their mod- ernization at the expense of poor ones, by taking their valuable nat- ural resources and exploiting their human labor. Even today, the world’s poorest countries remain locked in a disadvantageous eco- nomic relationship with rich nations, dependent on wealthy coun- tries to buy their raw materials and in return provide them with whatever manufactured products they can afford. According to this view, continuing ties with rich societies will only perpetuate current patterns of global inequality.

Whichever approach you find more convincing, keep in mind that change in the United States is no longer separate from change in the rest of the world. At the beginning of the twentieth century,

most people in today’s high-income countries lived in relatively small settlements with limited awareness of the larger world. Today, the world has become one huge village because the lives of all people are increasingly interconnected.

The twentieth century witnessed unprecedented human achieve- ment. Yet solutions to many problems of human existence—including finding meaning in life, resolving conflicts between societies, and eliminating poverty—have eluded us. The Seeing Sociology in Every- day Life box examines one dilemma: balancing individual freedom and personal responsibility. To this list of pressing matters new con- cerns have been added, such as controlling population growth and establishing an environmentally sustainable society. In the coming years, we must be prepared to tackle such problems with imagination, compassion, and determination. Our growing understanding of human society gives us reason to be hopeful that we can get the job done.

says little about conservative goals, such as strengthening religious beliefs and supporting traditional families.

Etzioni responds that the criticism coming from both sides suggests he has found a mod- erate, sensible answer to a serious problem. But the debate may also indicate that in a society as diverse as the United States, peo- ple who are so quick to assert their rights are not so ready to agree on their responsibilities.

WHAT DO YOU THINK?

1. Have you ever failed to come to the aid of someone in need or danger? Why did you not take action?

2. Half a century ago, President John F. Kennedy stated, “Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country.” Do you think people today support this idea? Why or why not?

3. Are you willing to serve on a jury? Do you mind paying your fair share of taxes? Would you be willing to perform a year of national service after you graduate from college? Explain your answers.

moral community only by limiting their range of personal choices about how to live. In short, although we value both community and free- dom, we can’t have it both ways.

The famed sociologist Amitai Etzioni (1993, 1996, 2003) has tried to strike a middle ground. The communitarian movement rests on the sim- ple idea that with rights must come responsibili- ties. Put another way, our pursuit of self-interest must be balanced by a commitment to the larger community.

Etzioni claims that modern people have become too concerned about individual rights. We expect the system to work for us, but we are reluctant to support the system. For example, we believe that people accused of a crime deserve their day in court, but fewer and fewer of us are willing to perform jury duty; similarly, we are quick to accept government services but reluctant to support these services with our taxes.

The communitarians advance four propos- als toward balancing individual rights with pub- lic responsibilities. First, our society should stop the expanding “culture of rights” by which we put our own interests ahead of social responsibility. The Constitution, which is

quoted so often when discussing individual rights, does not guarantee us the right to do whatever we want. Second, we must remember that we cannot take from society without giving something back. Third, the well-being of every- one may require limiting our individual rights; for example, pilots and bus drivers who are responsible for public safety may be asked to take drug tests. Fourth, no one can ignore key responsibilities such as obeying the law and responding to a cry for help from someone like Kitty Genovese.

The communitarian movement appeals to many people who believe in both personal free- dom and social responsibility. But Etzioni’s pro- posals have drawn criticism from both sides of the political spectrum. To those on the left, problems ranging from voter apathy to street crime cannot be solved by some vague idea of “social responsibility.” As they see it, what is needed is expanded government programs to protect people and lessen inequality.

Conservatives, on the political right, see dif- ferent problems in Etzioni’s proposals (Pearson, 1995). As they see it, the communitarian move- ment favors liberal goals, such as confronting prejudice and protecting the environment, but

Think of people you admire. Do you admire them for their personal achievement, social responsibility, or a combination of the two?

Seeing Sociology in Everyday Life

After reading the box below, think of ways your campus encourages a sense of community and social responsibility.

Seeing Sociology in Everyday Life

IS B

N 1-

25 6-

36 95

7- 8

500

Seeing Sociology in Everyday Life

500

Chapter 16 Social Change: Modern and Postmodern Societies

HINT Although sociologists analyze tradition and modernity as conceptual opposites, every society combines these elements in various ways. People may debate the virtues of traditional and modern life, but the two patterns are found almost everywhere. Techno- logical change always has social consequences—for example, the use of cell phones changes people’s social networks and economic opportunities; similarly, the spread of McDonald’s changes not only what people eat but where and with whom they share meals.

Is tradition the opposite of modernity? Conceptually, this may be true. But as this chapter explains, traditional and modern social patterns combine in all sorts of interesting ways in our everyday lives. Look at the photographs below, and identify elements of tradition and modernity. Do they seem to go together, or are they in conflict? Why?

These young girls live in the city of Istanbul in Turkey, a country that has long debated the merits of traditional

and modern life. What sets off traditional and modern ways of

dressing? Do you think such differences are likely to affect

patterns of friendship? Would the same be true

in the United States?

IS B

N 1-256-36957-8

501501501

1. How do tradition and modernity combine in your life? Point to several ways in which you are traditional and several ways in which you are thoroughly modern.

2. Ask people in your class or friendship group to make five predictions about U.S. society in the year 2050, when today’s twenty-year-olds will be senior citizens. Compare notes. On what issues is there agreement?

3. Do you think the rate of social change has been increasing? Do some research about modes of travel—including walk- ing, riding animals, bicycles, trains, cars, airplanes, and rockets. At what point in history did each of these ways of moving come into being? What pattern do you see?

Applying SOCIOLOGY in Everyday Life

In Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, these young men are shopping for the latest in cell phones. Does such modern technology threaten a

society’s traditions?

When the first McDonald’s restaurant opened in the city of Kiev in Ukraine, many people stopped by to taste a hamburger and see what “fast food” was all about. As large corporations expand their operations around the world, do they tip the balance away from tradition in favor of modernity? How?

IS B

N 1-

25 6-

36 95

7- 8

Causes of Social Change

Making the Grade

V IS

U A

L S

U M

M A

R Y CHAPTER 16 Social Change: Modern and Postmodern Societies

Making the Grade

What Is Social Change?

social change (p. 479) the transformation of culture and social institutions over time

SOCIAL CHANGE is the transformation of culture and social institutions over time. Every society changes all the time, sometimes faster, sometimes more slowly. Social change often generates controversy.

pp. 478–79

social movement (p. 481) an organized activity that encourages or discourages social change

claims making (p. 482) the process of trying to convince the public and public officials of the importance of joining a social movement to address a particular issue

relative deprivation (p. 482) a perceived disadvantage arising from some specific comparison

disaster (p. 484) an event, generally unexpected, that causes extensive harm to people and damage to property.

CULTURE

• Invention produces new objects, ideas, and social patterns.

• Discovery occurs when people take notice of existing elements of the world.

• Diffusion creates change as products, people, and information spread from one society to another.

SOCIAL CONFLICT

• Karl Marx claimed that class conflict between capitalists and workers pushes society toward a socialist system of production.

• Social conflict arising from class, race, and gender inequality has resulted in social changes that have improved the lives of working people.

p. 480p. 480

IDEAS Max Weber traced the roots of most social changes to ideas:

• The fact that industrial capitalism developed first in areas of Western Europe where the Protestant work ethic was strong demonstrates the power of ideas to bring about change.

DEMOGRAPHIC FACTORS Population patterns play a part in social change:

• The aging of U.S. society has resulted in changes to family life and the development of consumer products to meet the needs of the elderly.

• Migration within and between societies promotes change.

pp. 480–81p. 480

TYPES OF SOCIAL MOVEMENTS

• Alterative social movements seek limited change in specific individuals (example: Promise Keepers).

• Redemptive social movements seek radical change in specific individuals (example: Alcoholics Anonymous).

• Reformative social movements seek limited change in the whole society (example: the environmental movement).

• Revolutionary social movements seek radical change in the whole society (example: the Communist party).

EXPLANATIONS OF SOCIAL MOVEMENTS

• Deprivation theory: Social movements arise among people who feel deprived of something, such as income, safe working conditions, or political rights.

• Mass-society theory: Social movements attract socially isolated people who join a movement in order to gain a sense of identity and purpose.

• Resource mobilization theory: Success of a social movement is linked to available resources, including money, labor, and the mass media.

• Culture theory: Social movements depend not only on money and resources but also on cultural symbols that motivate people.

• New social movements theory: Social movements in postindustrial societies are typically international in scope and focus on quality-of-life issues.

pp. 482–83

p. 481

Social Movements

Disasters cause unexpected social change:

• natural disasters (example: Hurricane Katrina)

• technological disasters (example: nuclear accident at the Chernobyl power plant)

• intentional disasters (example: Darfur genocide)

Disasters

What Is Modernity?

modernity (p. 485) social patterns resulting from industrialization

modernization (p. 485) the process of social change begun by industrialization

division of labor (p. 487) specialized economic activity

anomie (p. 488) Durkheim’s term for a condition in which society provides little moral guidance to individuals

MODERNITY refers to the social consequences of industrialization, which include the decline of traditional communities, the expansion of personal choice, increasing social diversity, and a focus on the future.

• Ferdinand Tönnies described modernization as the transition from Gemeinschaft to Gesellschaft, characterized by the loss of traditional community and the rise of individualism.

• Emile Durkheim saw modernization as a society’s expanding division of labor. Mechanical solidarity, based on shared activities and beliefs, is gradually replaced by organic solidarity, in which specialization makes people interdependent.

• Max Weber saw modernity as the decline of a traditional worldview and the rise of rationality. Weber feared the dehumanizing effects of rational organization.

• Karl Marx saw modernity as the triumph of capitalism over feudalism. Capitalism creates social conflict, which Marx claimed would bring about revolutionary change leading to an egalitarian socialist society.

pp. 485–89

502

Watch on mysoclab.com

Explore on mysoclab.com

Read on mysoclab.com

pp. 484–85

IS B

N 1-256-36957-8

V IS

U A

L S

U M

M A

R Y

503

Modernity and the Individual

Both mass-society theory and class-society theory are macro-level approaches; from them, however, we can also draw micro-level insights into how modernity shapes individual lives.

MASS SOCIETY: PROBLEMS OF IDENTITY

• Mass-society theory suggests that the great social diversity, widespread isolation, and rapid social change of modern societies make it difficult for individuals to establish a stable social identity.

David Riesman described the changes in social character that modernity causes:

• Preindustrial societies exhibit tradition-directedness: Everyone in society draws on the same solid cultural foundation, and people model their lives on those of their ancestors.

• Modern societies exhibit other-directedness: Because their socialization occurs in societies that are continuously in flux, other-directed people develop fluid identities marked by superficiality, inconsistency, and change.

CLASS SOCIETY: PROBLEMS OF POWERLESSNESS

• Class-society theory claims that the problem facing most people today is economic uncertainty and powerlessness.

• Herbert Marcuse claimed that modern society is irrational because it fails to meet the needs of so many people.

• Marcuse also believed that technological advances further reduce people’s control over their own lives.

• People suffer because modern societies have concentrated both wealth and power in the hands of a privileged few.

p. 493

pp. 493–94

p. 494

social character (p. 494) personality patterns common to members of a particular society

tradition-directedness (p. 494) rigid conformity to time-honored ways of living

other-directedness (p. 494) openness to the latest trends and fashions, often expressed by imitating others

Modernity and Progress

Social change is too complex and controversial simply to be equated with progress:

• A rising standard of living has made lives longer and materially more comfortable; at the same time, many people are stressed and have little time to relax with their families; measures of happiness have declined in recent decades.

• Science and technology have brought many conveniences to our everyday lives, yet many people are concerned that life is changing too fast; the introduction of automobiles and advanced communication technology have weakened traditional attachments to hometowns and even to families.

pp. 494–95

Theoretical Analysis of Modernity

mass society (p. 490) a society in which prosperity and bureaucracy have weakened traditional social ties

class society (p. 492) a capitalist society with pronounced social stratification

STRUCTURAL-FUNCTIONAL THEORY: MODERNITY AS MASS SOCIETY

• According to mass-society theory, modernity increases the scale of life, enlarging the role of government and other formal organizations in carrying out tasks previously performed by families in local communities.

• Cultural diversity and rapid social change make it difficult for people in modern societies to develop stable identities and to find meaning in their lives.

See the Summing Up tables on pages 491 and 493.

SOCIAL-CONFLICT THEORY: MODERNITY AS CLASS SOCIETY

• According to class-society theory, modernity involves the rise of capitalism into a global economic system resulting in persistent social inequality.

• By concentrating wealth in the hands of a few, modern capitalist societies generate widespread feelings of alienation and powerlessness.

pp. 492–93 pp. 490–92

Modernity: Global Variation

Although we often think of tradition and modernity as opposites, traditional and modern elements coexist in most societies.

p. 495

Postmodernity

postmodernity (p. 496) social patterns characteristic of postindustrial societies

POSTMODERNITY refers to the cultural traits of postindustrial societies. Postmodern criticism of society centers on the failure of modernity, and specifically science, to fulfill its promise of prosperity and well-being.

pp. 496–97

IS B

N 1-

25 6-

36 95

7- 8