associated with disturbances to the status quo. The tendency of modernization
theory was to encourage the view that such reactions were a refusal to be
dragged into the modern world, when what is happening is not due to a lack
of rationality but to a different system of incentives operating under condi-
tions that include poverty and dependency. The secular and the rational may
benefit some groups in society much more than others. A family planning pro-
gramme may be readily taken up by wealthy families if they do not need chil-
dren to assist in the cultivation of their land. It might not be accepted so
readily by a poor family that cannot hire labour and whose existence as an
economic unit depends upon their children; or by people who know that when
they get old there will be no welfare state, or community care.
Secondly, ethnic conflict is similarly seen by modernization theory as
a by-product of tradition. Modernization theorists could see that colonial-
ism often meant grouping societies together in an arbitrary way. But ethnic
conflict after independence tended to be seen as a conflict between the
primordial values of tribe and race and the modern values of nationalism,
when people think of themselves as individual members of a nation state
rather than as members of some sub-national collectivity such as a linguis-
tic group. Again, there may be very ‘modern’ reasons, such as economic
exploitation or political discrimination, for conflict between groups identi-
fied by reference to ‘traditional’ attributes and perceptions.
Modernization theory can also be charged with ideological conservatism
in the way it blames backwardness on the traditions of a people rather than
on internal conflicts or external interventions, such as imperialism, and
in the way it implicitly rules out the need for revolutionary change.
‘Evolution’ may appear a strange concept to employ in descriptions of his-
tories that in both the developed and underdeveloped worlds have been so
significantly affected by revolutions and wars. Modernization theory is
striking for what it leaves out in its attempt to produce an explanation of
change, notably class conflict, colonialism and revolution (Rhodes, 1968).
The influence of external forces is the most noticeable omission from the
modernization perspective. At the very most, external influences are
perceived as limited to the diffusion of Western cultural attributes to non-
Western societies. The colonial episode is notably problematic and can only
be integrated into the ‘traditional/modern’ dichotomy with great difficulty,
either as a hybrid or as a ‘transitional’ stage of evolution (Tipps, 1973, p. 212).
The static and uniform conception of tradition has also been criticized,
notably by J. R. Gusfield (1967), who warns that it is ‘fallacious to assume
that a traditional society has always existed in its present form’. Traditional
cultures and social structures not only consist of diverse norms and values.
60 Understanding Third World Politics