PDF - Debate on Modernization by Samuel P. Huntington

CHAPTER 2 The Debate on Modernization In the twenty-first century, the French Revolution no longer dominates discussions of revo- lution. Scholars must also confront the many revolutions of the twentieth century: in Mexico in 191 O; in Russia in 1917; in China from...

CHAPTER 2 The Debate on Modernization In the twenty-first century, the French Revolution no longer dominates discussions of revo- lution. Scholars must also confront the many revolutions of the twentieth century: in Mexico in 191 O; in Russia in 1917; in China from 1911 to 1949; in Persia in 1905; in the Ottoman Em- pire (Turkey) in 1919; and in a host of Third World countries, including Vietnam, Bolivia, and Cuba, in the 1950s and 1960s. As de Tocqueville and vVeber suggested, such revolutions usually led to stronger, more centralized, and more bureaucratic states. But the origins of these revolutions rarely fit the pattern that Marx and Engels set forth. Instead of occurring A ,after bourgeois, capitalist revolutions, socialist revolutions have occurred in relatively poor countries that were just beginning the modernization of their economies. Moreover, instead of industrial laborers carrying out socialist revolutions, peasants have often played the major role. Although theorists of revolution continue to value Marx's insight that revolutions arise from the struggle of different groups competing for dominance, it is clear that revolutions can arise in ways Marx did not foresee. Therefore, these revolutions have prompted schol- ars to reinvestigate the causes of revolution and to seek connections between modernization and revolution. In the following selections, two prominent scholars discuss the different ways in which revolutions can arise. Their debate suggests that modernization does not necessarily lead to revolution; the key issue is whether modernization leads to a change in the balance of power among those groups in a society that are contending for political power. Revolution and Political Order SAMUEL P. HUNTINGTON Huntington argues that a key aspect of modernization is the demand for increased participation in politics. Where certain groups do not have access to political power, their demands to change and broaden government may lead to revolution. In dis- cussing a wide range of revolutions, including those in France, Russia, China, Mex- ico, Turkey, Vietnam, and Persia (Iran was called Persia at the time of the fall of the Qajar dynasty in 1925), Huntington identifies different patterns of revolution and examines the roles of moderates, counterrevolutionaries, and radicals. A revolution is a rapid, fundamental, and violent domestic change in the dominant values and myths of a society, in its political institutions, social structure, leadership, and government 37 38 2 The Debate on Modern; ,. ,at ion · activity and policies R l.. evo utions ar th b revolts, coups and wars f. d e us to e distinguished from insurrect· ' o m epend A ' ions b perhaps policies· a reb.. ence. coup d etat in itself changes on! I 're ellioh. , e 11 10n or msu · Y ead h '"I stitutions but nots. l rrection may change policies, leadership d ers ip oc1a structure d I. 'an po) 1·. "'l (1 ~h ' munity against rul b. an va ues; a war of mdependence is a struggJ f t1ca1 in. e Y an a11en co · dd e O on social structure f. h mmumty an oes not necessarily involve h econi. o e1t er comm 't Wh. h c ange 8 1. have called t I. um Y· at 1s ere called simply "revolution''. h n the grea revo ut1ons d I.. is w at Oth the French Ch' 'gran revo 1jt10ns, or social revolutions. Notable er8 , mese Me · R. exarnp] t1 R I. ' xican, uss1an, and Cuban revolutions. es are evo ut1ons are rare M... d. · ost soc1et1es have never experienced revolutions an I Unt 11 mo ern times did tk ' c rnost.. no now revolutions. More precisely, revolution is ch ages o f mo d ermzat1on R I. h. aracter-1811.. f th.... · evo ution 1st e ultimate expression of the modernizing outlook h c lIe at It 1s w1thm the f.. , t eb.. power o man to control and to change his environment and th th e. not on.ly th e ab1hty bu t th e ng h t to d o so. For this reason, as Hannah Arendt observea ehas. lence 1s no more adequ t t d.6 th h f. s, v10. h. a e o escn e e p enomenon o revolut10n than change; only wh c ange ~ccurs m the sense of a new beginning, where violence is used to constitute an Jere g ether different~orm o f government, to bring about the formation of a new body politi a to. can we speak of revolution." 1 c· · Revolution is thus an aspect of modernization. It is not something which can occur in a ~ype o~ s~ciety at any period in its history. It is not a universal category but rather an histo7- 1cally hm1~ed phenomenon. It will not occur in highly traditional societies with very low lev- els of social and economic complexity. Nor will it occur in highly modern societies. Like other forms of violence and instability, it is most likely to occur in societies which have ex- perienced some social and economic development and where the processes of political mod- ernization and political development have lagged behind the processes of social and eco- nomic change. Political modernization involves the extension of political consciousness to new social groups and the mobilization of these groups into politics. Political development involves the creation of political institutions sufficiently adaptable, complex, autonomous, and coherent to absorb and to order the participation of these new groups and to promote social and eco- nomic change in the society. The political essence of revolution is the rapid expansion of po- litical consciousness and the rapid mobilization of new groups into politics at a speed which makes it impossible for existing political institutions to assimilate them. Revolution is the extreme case of the explosion of political participation. Without this explosion there is no revolution. A complete revolution, however, also involves a second phase: the creation and institutionalization of a new political order. The successful revolution combines rapid polit- ical mobilization and rapid political institutionalization. Not all revolutions produce a new political order. The measure of how revolutionary a revolution is is the rapidity and the scope of the expansion of political participation. The measure of how successful a revolu· tion is is the authority and stability of the institutions to which it gives birth. A full-scale revolution thus involves the rapid and violent destruction of existing polit- ical institutions, the mobilization of new groups into politics, and the creation of new polit· From Po litical Ord er in Changing Societies. Reprinred with permission