In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Chapter 6 Structural Change, Cultural Change, and Civic Violence Perhaps the single area of social science in which rational choice theories have had the least impact is in explaining long-term social, political and economic change. These topics, which have generally been studied under such theoretical labels as modernization, political development, and social change,l have been for the most part been ignored by rational choice theorists. While it is difficult to extract a single reason why this is so, it is useful to note that almost all non-Marxist theories of longterm change implicitly or explicitly make use of cultural change as an independent causal variable or an intervening variable between structural and behavioral change.2 Conventional rational choice, on the other hand, has great difficulty in incorporating cultural diversity or change into its analysis.3 This leaves rational choice theorists without a well-established basis from which to develop their theories of longterm social and political change other than the reductionist materialist explanations of the Marxists.4 The emphasis on cultural change is central to perhaps the most prominent hypothesis in all of social theory, that describing the transition from "traditional "to "modern "society. It has been presented in various forms by various authors, but each puts forward 1 Although the terms "modernization ," "development" and "change" are quite similar, they have somewhat different nuances. "Modernization ," along with frequent companion "evolution ," suggests a movement that occurs in one direction relative to time, while "development"suggests a movement that is normatively desirable. These nuances give them a different flavor from the almost completely neutral "change." In practice, the terms often tend to be used interchangeably, though many theorists have been attacked for equating the latter two with movement toward the patterns of Western industrialized societies. An additional complication is the fact that "development "has to a certain extent become a generic term for Third World studies, even for static analysis, a usage which is followed to a certain extent in this book. These terminological issues have been a constant source of debate; see for instance Whitacker 1967; Huntington 1976; Riggs 1981. 2 Weiner 1966, intro., 9; Ruttan 1991, 276. Culture will be defined here in the psychological sense as collectively held preferences and beliefs, with the beliefs not based purely on logical inference from available information. See discussions in chapters 1 and 2. 3 The only ways in which culture can be incorporated into conventional rational choice is as logically held beliefs derived from access to different types of information. As argued in chapter 1, however, this is an extremely narrow and limiting view of variations in preferences and beliefs. 4 These are generally rejected by rational choice theorists for reasons having more to do with the historical origins of the two approaches rather than any methodological incompatibility. Even rational choice Marxists, like Roemer and (sometimes) Elster, do not put their emphases on Marx's theory of social change. See also discussion in chapter 2. 213 214 Choosing an Identity the two aforementioned ideal types, associating tradition with cultural characteristics such as high levels of affect, homogenous beliefs, narrow horizons and stereotyped thinking; behavioral characteristics such as low political and educational participation and geographical inertia; and structural characteristics such as poverty, subsistence agriculture, a homogeneous division of labor, and simple hereditary authority structures. l\Iodernity is associated with individualism, diversified beliefs, heightened awareness. and openness to change; high levels of participation and mobility; and material prosperity. industrialization, urbanization. occupational specialization. formalized law, strong public administration and a stable democracv.·s In this chapter, I examine the best-known versions of this hypothesis, put fonyard in the theories of "classical "nineteenth century social theorists such as Tonnies and Durkheim. which posited that societies moved inevitably forward, along a single line, from tradition to modernity. I then move onto theorists working within the past-\Vorld Volar II modernization approach, showing how they have significantly modified the classical version of t he hypothesis. I then examine criticisms of these theories, focusing on their accusations of unilinearity. teleology and ethnocentrism. I argue that the classical theorists were vulnerable to these criticisms, while the post-\Vorld \Var II modernization theorists were not. However. in addressing these problems the later theorists also removed the common deductive basis that had held the classical theories together. I then posit that the major common weakness of theories of tradition and modernity is their lack of rnicrofoundations. No existing theory is grounded in a single. general and assertive set of...

Share