Understanding Sociology Chapter Two

CHAPTER 2

SOCIAL CHANGE AND SOCIAL ORDER IN RURAL ANDURBAN SOCIETY

It is often said that change is theonly unchanging aspect of society.Anyone living in modern society doesnot need to be reminded that constantchange is among the most permanentfeatures of our society. In fact, thediscipline of sociology itself emergedas an effort to make sense of the rapidchanges that Western Europeansociety had experienced between theseventeenth and nineteenth centuries.

But though social changeseems such a common and obviousfact about modern life, it is comparatively speaking a very newand recent fact. It is estimated thathuman beings have existed on planet

earth for approximately 500,000 (fivelakh) years, but they have had acivilized existence for only about 6,000years. Of these civilized years, it is onlyin the last 400 years that we have seenconstant and rapid change; evenwithin these years of change, the pacehas accelerated only in the last 100years. Because the speed with whichchange happens has been increasingsteadily, it is probably true that in thelast hundred years, change has beenfaster in the last fifty years than inthe first fifty. And within the last fiftyyears, the world may have changedmore in the last twenty years than inthe first thirty

The Clock of Human History

Human beings have existed on earth for about half a million years. Agriculture,the necessary basis of fixed settlements, is only about twelve thousand years old.Civilisations date back no more than six thousand years or so. If we were to thinkof the entire span of human existence thus far as a day (stretching from midnightto midnight), agriculture would have come into existence at 11:56 pm andcivilisations at 11:57. The development of modern societies would get underwayonly at 11:59 and 30 seconds! Yet perhaps as much change has taken place inthe last thirty seconds of this human day as in all the time leading up to it.From: Anthony Giddens,2004 Sociology, 4th edition, p.40.

Aaditya

Aaditya

Aaditya

Aaditya

23SOCIAL CHANGE AND SOCIAL ORDER IN RURAL AND URBAN SOCIETY

Activity 1

Talk to your elders and make a listof the things in your life that: (a) didnot exist when your parents wereyour age; and (b) did not exist whenyour grandparents were your age.

Eg: Black & white/colour TV;milk in plastic bags; zip fasteners onclothes; plastic buckets; etc. did itexist in your parents/grandparentschildhood?

Can you also make a list of thingsthat existed in your parents/grandparents time but dont exist inyour time?

SOCIAL CHANGE

Social change is such a general termthat it can be, and often is, used torefer to almost any kind of change notqualified by some other term, such aseconomic or political change.Sociologists have had to work hard tolimit this broad meaning in order tomake the term more specific andhence useful for social theory. At themost basic level, social change refersto changes that are significant thatis, changes which alter the underlyingstructure of an object or situation overa period of time (Giddens 2005:42).Thus social change does not includeany and all changes, but only big ones,changes which transform thingsfundamentally. The bigness ofchange is measured not only by howmuch change it brings about, but alsoby the scale of the change, that is, byhow large a section of society it affects.In other words, changes have to beboth intensive and extensive have a

big impact spread over a large sectorof society in order to qualify as socialchange.

Even after this kind ofspecification, social change stillremains a very broad term. Attemptsto further qualify it usually try toclassify it by its sources or causes; byits nature, or the kind of impact it hason society; and by its pace or speed.

For example, evolution is the namegiven to a kind of change that takesplace slowly over a long period of time.This term was made famous by thenatural scientist Charles Darwin, whoproposed a theory of how livingorganisms evolve or change slowlyover several centuries or even millenia,by adapting themselves to naturalcircumstances. Darwins theoryemphasized the idea of the survival ofthe fittest only those life formsmanage to survive who are bestadapted to their environment; thosethat are unable to adapt or are too slowto do so die out in the long run. Darwinsuggested that human beings evolvedfrom sea-borne life forms (or varietiesof fish) to land-based mammals,passing through various stages thehighest of which were the variousvarieties of monkeys and chimpanzeesuntil finally the homo sapiens orhuman form was evolved. AlthoughDarwins theory refered to naturalprocesses, it was soon adapted to thesocial world and was termed socialDarwinism, a theory that emphasisedthe importance of adaptive change. Incontrast to evolutionary change,change that occurs comparatively

Aaditya

Aaditya

24 UNDERSTANDING SOCIETY

quickly, even suddenly, is sometimescalled revolutionary change. It is usedmainly in the political context, whenthe power structure of society changesvery rapidly through the overthrow ofa former ruling class or group by itschallengers. Examples include theFrench revolution (1789-93) and theSoviet or Russian revolution of 1917.But the term has also been used moregenerally to refer to sharp, sudden andtotal transformations of other kinds aswell, such as in the phrase industrialrevolution or telecommunicationsrevolution, and so on.

Activity 2

Refer to the discussions about theFrench Revolution and the IndustrialRevolution which you have comeacross before in your textbooks.What were the major kinds of changethat each brought about? Wouldthese changes qualify to be calledsocial change? Were these changesfast enough and far reaching enoughto qualify as revolutionary change?What other kinds of social changehave you come across in your bookswhich might not qualify asrevolutionary change? Why wouldthey not qualify?

Types of change that are identifiedby their nature or impact includestructural change and changes inideas, values and beliefs. Structuralchange refers to transformations inthe structure of society, to itsinstitutions or the rules by whichthese institutions are run. (Recall thediscussion of social structure from the

previous chapter.) For example, theemergence of paper money ascurrency marked a major change inthe organisation of financial marketsand transactions. Until this changecame about, most forms of currencyinvolved precious metals like gold andsilver. The value of the coin wasdirectly linked to the value of the goldor silver it contained. By contrast, thevalue of a paper currency note has norelationship to the value of the paperit is printed on, or the cost of itsprinting. The idea behind papermoney was that a medium or meansfor facilitating the exchange of goodsand services need not itself beintrinsically valuable. As long as itrepresents values convincingly i.e.,as long as it inspires trust almostanything can function as money. Thisidea was the foundation for the creditmarket and helped change thestructure of banking and finance.These changes in turn producedfurther changes in the organisation ofeconomic life.

Changes in values and beliefs canalso lead to social change. Forexample, changes in the ideas andbeliefs about children and childhoodhave brought about very importantkinds of social change, there was atime when children were simplyconsidered small adults there wasno special concept of childhood assuch, with its associated notions ofwhat was right or wrong for childrento do. As late as the 19th century forexample, it was considered good andproper that children start to work as

Aaditya

Aaditya

Aaditya

Aaditya


soon as they were able to. Childrenwere often helping their families atwork from the age of five or six; theearly factory system depended on thelabour of children. It was during the19th and early 20th centuries thatideas about childhood as a specialstage of life gained influence. It thenbecame unthinkable for smallchildren to be at work, and manycountries passed laws banning childlabour. At the same time, thereemerged ideas about compulsoryeducation, and children weresupposed to be in school rather thanat work, and many laws were passedfor this as well. Although there are

some industries in our country thateven today depend on child labour atleast partially (such as carpet weaving,small tea shops or restaurants, match-stick making, and so on), child labouris illegal and employers can bepunished as criminals.

But by far the most common wayof classifying social change is by itscauses or sources. Sometimes thecauses are pre-classif ied intointernal (or endogenous) andexternal (or exogenous) causes.There are five broad types of sourcesor causes of social change:environmental, technological,economic, political and cultural.

Students in a classroom

Aaditya


Environment

Nature, ecology and the physicalenvironment have always had asignificant influence on the structureand shape of society. This wasparticularly true in the past whenhuman beings were unable to controlor overcome the effects of nature. Forexample, people living in a desertenvironment were unable to practisesettled agriculture of the sort that waspossible in the plains, near rivers andso on. So the kind of food they ate orthe clothes they wore, the way theyearned their livelyhood, and theirpatterns of social interaction were alldetermined to a large extent by thephysical and climatic conditions of

their environment. The same was truefor people living in very cold climates,or in port towns, along major traderoutes or mountain passes, or in fertileriver valleys. But the extent to whichthe environment influences societyhas been decreasing over time with theincrease in technological resources.Technology allows us to overcome oradapt to the problems posed bynature, thus reducing the differencesbetween societies living in differentsorts of environments. On the otherhand, technology also alters natureand our relationship to it in new ways(see the chapter on environment inthis book). So it is perhaps moreaccurate to say that the effect of

A child doing skilled work


may have shaped societies, but how didit play any role in social change? Theeasiest and most powerful answer tothis question can be found in naturaldisasters. Sudden and catastrophicevents such as earthquakes, volcaniceruptions, floods, or tidal waves (likethe tsunami that hit Indonesia, SriLanka, the Andaman Islands and partsof Tamil Nadu in December 2004) canchange societies quite drastically.These changes are often irreversible,that is, they are permanent and dontallow a return to the way things were.For example, it is quite possible thatmany of those whose livelihoods weredestroyed by the tsunami will never beable to return to them again, and thatmany of the coastal villages will havetheir social structure completelyaltered. There are numerous instancesof natural disasters leading to a totaltransformation and sometimes totaldestruction of societies in history.Environmental or ecological factorsneed not only be destructive to causechange, they can be constructive aswell. A good example is the discoveryof oil in the desert regions of West Asia(also called the Middle East). Like thediscovery of gold in California in the19th century, oil reserves in the MiddleEast have completely transformed thesocieties in which they were found.Countries like Saudi Arabia, Kuwait orthe United Arab Emirates would be verydifferent today without their oil wealth.

Technology and Economy

The combination of technological andeconomic change has been responsible

The earth caves in after heavy floods

nature on society is changing ratherthan simply declining.

But how, you might ask, does thisaffect social change? The environment


for immense social changes, speciallyin the modern period. Technologyaffects society in a wide variety ofways. As seen above, it can help us toresist, control, adapt to or harnessnature in dif ferent ways. Incombination with the very powerfulinstitution of the market, technologicalchange can be as impressive in itssocial impact as natural factors like atsunami or the discovery of oil. Themost famous instance of massive andimmediately visible social changebrought about by technological changeis the Industrial Revolution itself,which you have already read about.

You will surely have heard of themassive social impact made by thesteam engine. The discovery of steampower allowed emerging forms of largescale industry to use of a source ofenergy that was not only far strongerthan animals or human beings, butwas also capable of continuousoperation without the need for rest.When harnessed to modes of transportlike the steam ship and the railway, ittransformed the economy and socialgeography of the world. The railroadenabled the westward expansion ofindustry and trade on the Americancontinent and in Asia. In India too,the railways have played a veryimportant role in shaping theeconomy, specially in the first centuryafter their introduction in 1853.Steamships made ocean voyagesmuch faster and much more reliable,thereby changing the dynamics of

international trade and migration.Both these developments createdgigantic ripples of change whichaffected not only the economy but alsothe social, cultural and demographicdimensions of world society.

The importance and impact ofsteam power became visible relativelyquickly; however, sometimes, thesocial impact of technological changesbecomes visible only retrospectively.A technological invention or discoverymay produce limited immediateef fects, as though it were lyingdormant. Some later change in theeconomic context may suddenlychange the social significance of thesame invention and give it recognitionas a historic event. Examples of thisare the discovery of gunpowder andwriting paper in China, which hadonly limited impact for centuries untilthey were inserted into the context ofmodernising Western Europe. Fromthat vantage point, given theadvantage of enabling circumstances,gunpowder helped to transform thetechnology of warfare and the paper-print revolution changed societyforever. Another example closer homeis the case of technological innovationsin the textile industry in Britain. Incombination with market forces andimperial power, the new spinning andweaving machines destroyed thehandloom industry of the Indiansubcontinent which was, until then,the largest and most advanced in theworld.

Aaditya


Activity 3

Have you noticed other suchtechnological changes which havesocial consequences in your own life?Think of the photo-copying machineand its impact. Have you everthought of what things were likebefore photo-copying became socheap and freely available? Anotherexample could be the STD telephonebooths. Try to find out how peoplecommunicated before thesetelephone boths had appeared andvery few homes had telephoneconnections. Make a list of othersuch examples.

Sometimes changes in economicorganisation that are not directlytechnological can also change society.In a well-known historical example,plantation agriculture that is, thegrowing of single cash crops likesugarcane, tea or cotton on a largescale created a heavy demand forlabour. This demand helped toestablish the institution of slavery andthe slave trade between Africa, Europeand the Americas between the 17thand 19th centuries. In India, too, thetea plantations of Assam involved theforced migration of labour fromEastern India (specially the Adivasiareas of Jharkhand and Chattisgarh).Today, in many parts of the world,changes in customs duties or tariffsbrought about by internationalagreements and institutions like theWorld Trade Organisation, can lead toentire industries and occupationsbeing wiped out or (less often) suddenbooms or periods of prosperity forother industries or occupations.

Politics

In the old ways of writing andrecounting history, the actions ofkings and queens seemed to be themost important forces of socialchange. But as we know now, kingsand queens were the representativesof larger political, social and economictrends. Individuals may indeed havehad roles to play, but they were partof a larger context. In this sense,political forces have surely beenamong the most important causes ofsocial change. The clearest examplesare found in the history of warfare.When one society waged war onanother and conquered or wasconquered, social change was usuallyan immediate consequence.Sometimes, conquerors brought theseeds of change and planted themwherever they went. At other times,the conquered were actuallysuccessful in planting seeds of changeamong the conquerors andtransformed their societies. Althoughthere are many such examples inhistory, it is interesting to consider amodern instance that of the UnitedStates and Japan.

The United States won a famousvictory over Japan in the Second WorldWar, partly through the use of aweapon of mass destruction neverseen before in human history, thenuclear bomb. After the Japanesesurrender, the United States occupiedand ruled over Japan for several years,bringing about lots of changes,including land reform in Japan.Japanese industry, at that time, was


trying very hard to copy Americanindustry and learn from it. By the1970s, however, Japanese industrialtechniques, specially in fields like carmanufacturing, had gone far ahead ofthe Americans. Between the 1970sand 1990s, Japanese industrydominated the world and forcedchanges in the industrial organisationof Europe and specially the UnitedStates. The industrial landscape ofthe United States in particular wasdecisively altered by the impact ofJapanese industrial technology andproduction organisation. Large,traditionally dominant industries likesteel, automobiles and heavyengineering suffered major setbacksand had to restructure themselvesaccording to Japanese technologicaland management principles.Emerging fields like electronics werealso pioneered by the Japanese. Inshort, within the space of fourdecades, Japan had turned the tableson the United States, but througheconomic and technological meansrather than warfare.

Political changes need not only beinternational they can haveenormous social impact even at home.Although you may not have thoughtof it this way, the Indian independencemovement did not only bring aboutpolitical change in the form of the endof British rule, it also decisivelychanged Indian society. A more recentinstance is to be found in the Nepalipeoples rejection of monarchy in2006. More generally, politicalchanges bring about social change

through the redistribution of poweracross different social groups andclasses.

Considered from this viewpoint,universal adult franchise or the oneperson, one vote principle isprobably the single biggest politicalchange in history. Until moderndemocracies formally empowered thepeople with the vote, and untilelections became mandatory forexercising legitimate power, societywas structured very differently. Kingsand queens claimed to rule by divineright, and they were not reallyanswerable to the common people.Even when democratic principles ofvoting were first introduced, they didnot include the whole population in fact only a small minority couldvote, or had any say in the formationof the government. In the beginning,the vote was restricted to those whowere born into high status socialgroups of a particular race or ethincity,or to wealthy men who ownedproperty. All women, men of lowerclasses or subordinated ethnicities,and the poor and working people ingeneral were not allowed to vote.

It is only through long strugglesthat universal adult franchise came tobe established as a norm. Of course,this did not abolish all the inequalitiesof previous eras. Even today, not allcountries follow democratic forms ofrule; even where elections are held,they can be manipulated; and peoplecan continue to be powerless toinfluence the decisions of theirgovernment. But despite all this, it


cannot be denied that universal adultfranchise serves as a powerful normthat exerts pressure on every societyand every government. Governmentsmust now at least appear to seek theapproval of the people in order to beconsidered legitimate. This hasbrought massive social changes inits wake.

Culture

Culture is used here as a short labelfor a very wide field of ideas, values,beliefs, that are important to peopleand help shape their lives. Changesin such ideas and beliefs lead naturallyto changes in social life. Thecommonest example of a socio-cultural institution that has hadenormous social impact is religion.Religious beliefs and norms havehelped organise society and it is hardlysurprising that changes in thesebeliefs have helped transform society.So important has religion been, thatsome scholars have tended to definecivilisations in religious terms and tosee history as the process ofinteraction between religions.However, as with other importantfactors of social change, religion toois contextual it is able to produceeffects in some contexts but not inothers. Max Webers study theProtestant Ethic and the Spirit ofCapitalism showed how the religiousbeliefs of some Christian Protestantsects helped to establish the capitalistsocial system. It remains one of themost famous examples of the impactof cultural values on economic and

social change. In India too we findmany examples of religion bringingabout social change. Among the bestknown are the impact of Buddhism onsocial and political life in ancient India,and the widespread influence of theBhakti Movement on medieval socialstructure including the caste system.

A different example of culturalchange leading to social change canbe seen in the evolution of ideas aboutthe place of women in society. In themodern era, as women have struggledfor equality, they have helped changesociety in many ways. Womensstruggles have also been helped orhindered by other historicalcircumstances. For example, duringthe Second World War, women inwestern countries started to work infactories doing jobs that they hadnever done before, jobs which hadalways been done by men. The factthat women were able to build ships,operate heavy machinery, manufacturearmaments and so on, helpedestablish their claims to equality. Butit is equally true that, had it not beenfor the war, they would have had tostruggle for much longer. A verydifferent instance of change producedby the position of women can be seenin consumer advertising. In mosturban societies, it is women who takemost of the everyday decisions aboutwhat to buy for their households. Thishas made advertisers very sensitive tothe views and perspectives of womenas consumers. Significant proportionsof advertising expenditure are nowdirected at women, and this in turn


has effects on the media. In short,the economic role of women starts achain of changes which can have alarger social impact. For example,advertisements may tend to showwomen as decision-makers and asimportant people in ways that wouldnot have been considered orencouraged before. More generally,most advertisements used to beaddressed to men; now they areaddressed as much to women, or, insome sectors like householdappliances and consumer goods,mainly to women. So it is noweconomically important for advertisersand manufacturers to pay attentionto what women think and feel.

Yet another instance of culturalchange bringing about social changecan be found in the history of sports.Games and sports have always beenexpressions of popular culture thatsometimes acquire a lot ofimportance. The game of cricketbegan as a British aristocraticpastime, spread to the middle andworking classes of Britain, and fromthere to British colonies across theworld. As the game acquired rootsoutside Britain, it often turned into asymbol of national or racial pride.The very different history of intenserivalry in cricket shows the socialimportance of sport in a very tellingmanner. The England-Australiarivalry expressed the resentment ofthe socially subordinated colony(Australia) against the dominant

upper class centre of authority(England). Similarly, the completeworld dominance of the West Indiescricket team during the 1970s and1980s, was also an expression ofracial pride on the part of a colonisedpeople. In India, too, beating Englandat cricket was always seen assomething special, particularly beforeindependence. At another level, theimmense popularity of cricket in theIndian sub-continent has altered thecommercial profile of the game whichis now driven by the interests of SouthAsian fans, specially Indians.

As will be clear from the abovediscussion, no single factor or theorycan account for social change. Thecauses of social change may beinternal or external, the result ofdeliberate actions or accidentalevents. Moreover, the causes of socialchange are often interrelated.Economic and technological causesmay also have a cultural component,politics may be influenced byenvironment It is important to beaware of the many dimensions ofsocial change and its varied forms.Change is an important subject forus because the pace of change inmodern and specially contemporarytimes is much faster than what itused to be before. Although socialchange is better understoodretrospectively after it has alreadyoccurred we also need to be awareof it as it happens, and to prepare forit in whatever ways we can.


SOCIAL ORDER

The meaning of social events orprocesses often becomes clearthrough contrasts, just as the letterson the page that you are readingbecome legible because they contrastagainst the background. In the sameway, social change as a processacquires meaning against thebackdrop of continuity or lack ofchange. It may sound odd, butchange makes sense as a conceptonly if there are also some things thatare not changing, so that they offerthe possibility of comparison orcontrast. In other words, socialchange has to be understood togetherwith social order, which is thetendency within established socialsystems that resists and regulateschange.

Another way of looking at therelationship between social changeand social order is to think about thepossible reasons why society needs toprevent, discourage, or at least controlchange. In order to establish itself asa strong and viable social system,every society must be able toreproduce itself over time andmaintain its stability. Stabilityrequires that things continue more orless as they are that people continueto follow the same rules, that similaractions produce similar results, andmore generally, that individuals andinstitutions behave in a fairlypredictable manner.

Activity 4

We are used to thinking of samenessas boring and change as exciting; thisis also true, of course change canbe fun and lack of change can bereally dull. But think of what lifewould be like if you were forced tochange all the time What if younever, ever got the same food forlunch every day somethingdifferent, and never the same thingtwice, regardless of whether youliked it or not? Here is a scarierthought what if every time youcame back from school there weredifferent people at home, differentparents, different brothers andsisters? What if whenever youplayed your favourite game football, cricket, volleyball, hockeyand so on the rules were differenteach time? Think of other areas ofyour life where you would like thingsto not change too quickly. Are thereareas of your life where you wantthings to change quickly? Try tothink about the reasons why youwant or dont want change inparticular instances.

The above argument was anabstract and general one about thepossible reasons why societies mayneed to resist change. But there areusually more concrete and specificreasons why societies do in fact resistchange. Remember what you readabout social structure and socialstratification in Chapter 1. Mostsocieties most of the time are stratifiedin unequal ways, that is, the different


strata are differently positioned withrespect to command over economicresources, social status and politicalpower. It is not surprising that thosewho are favourably placed wish forthings to continue as they are, whilethose who are suffering disadvantagesare anxious for change. So the rulingor dominant groups in societygenerally resist any social changesthat may alter their status, becausethey have a vested interest in stability.On the other hand, the subordinatedor oppressed groups have a vestedinterest in change. Normal conditionsusually favour the rich and powerful,and they are able to resist change.This is another broad reason whysocieties are generally stable.

However, the notion of social orderis not restricted to the idea ofresistance to change, it also has amore positive meaning. It refers to theactive maintenance and reproductionof particular pattern of social relationsand of values and norms. Broadlyspeaking, social order can be achievedin one of two ways when peoplespontaneously wish to abide by a setof rules and norms; or when peopleare compelled in various ways to obeysuch norms. Every society employs acombination of these methods tosustain social order.

Spontaneous consent to socialorder derives ultimately from sharedvalues and norms which areinternalised by people through theprocess of socialisation. (Revisit thediscussion of socialisation inIntroducing Sociology). Socialisation

may be more or less efficient indif ferent contexts, but howeverefficient it is, it can never completelyerase the will of the individual. Inother words, socialisation cannot turnpeople into programmed robots itcannot produce complete andpermanent consent for all norms atall times. You may have experiencedthis in your own lives: rules or beliefswhich seem very natural and right atone point of time, dont seem soobviously correct at other times. Wequestion things we believed in thepast, and change our minds aboutwhat we regard as right or wrong.Sometimes, we may even return tobeliefs we once held and thenabandoned, only to rediscover themafresh at some later stage of life or indifferent circumstances. So, whilesocialisation does take on much of theburden of producing social order, it isnever enough by itself.

Thus, most modern societies mustalso depend on some form of power orcoercion to ensure that institutionsand individuals conform to establishedsocial norms. Power is usually definedas the ability to make others do whatyou want regardless of what theythemselves want. When a relationshipof power is stable and settled, and theparties involved have becomeaccustomed to their relative positions,we have a situation of domination. Ifa social entity (a person, institutionor group) is routinely or habitually ina position of power, it is said to bedominant. In normal times, dominantinstitutions, groups or individuals


exercise a decisive influence onsociety. It is not as though they arenever challenged, but this happensonly in abnormal or extraordinarytimes. Even though it implies thatpeople are being forced to do thingsthey dont necessarily want to do,domination in normal times can bequite smooth, in the sense ofappearing to be without friction ortension. (Revisit the discussion offorced cooperation from Chapter 1.Why, for example, did women not wantto claim their rights in their familiesof birth? Why did they consent tothe patriarchal norm).

Domination, Authority and LawHow is it that domination can be non-confrontational even when it clearlyinvolves unequal relationships wherecosts and benefits are unevenlydistributed? Part of the answer wehave already got from the discussionof the previous chapter dominantgroups extract cooperation in unequalrelationships because of their power.But why does this power work? Doesit work purely because of the threat ofthe use of force? This is where wecome to an important concept insociology, that of legitimation.

In social terms, legitimacy refersto the degree of acceptance that isinvolved in power relations.Something that is legitimate isaccepted as proper, just and fitting.In the broadest sense, it isacknowledged to be part of the socialcontract that is currently prevailing.In short, legitimacy implies conformityto existing norms of right, propriety

and justice. We have already seen howpower is defined in society; power initself is simply a fact it can be eitherlegitimate or not. Authority is definedby Max Weber as legitimate power that is, power considered to bejustified or proper. For example, apolice officer, a judge, or a schoolteacher all exercise different kinds ofauthority as part of their jobs. Thisauthority is explicitly provided to themby their official job description thereare written documents specifying theirauthority, and what they may and maynot do.

The fact that they have authorityautomatically implies that othermembers of society who have agreedto abide by its rules and regulations must obey this authority within itsproper domain. The domain of thejudge is the court room, and whencitizens are in the court, they aresupposed to obey the judge or defer toher/his authority. Outside thecourtroom, the judge is supposed tobe like any other citizen. So, on thestreet, S/he must obey the lawfulauthority of the police officer. Whenon duty, the policeman or woman hasauthority over the public actions of allcitizens except her/his superiorofficers. But police officers do not havejurisdiction over the private activitiesof citizens as long as they are notsuspected of being unlawful. Indifferent way different because thenature of the authority involved is lessstrictly or explicitly defined theteacher has authority over her/hispupils in the classroom. The authority


as an individual agree with aparticular law, it has binding force onme as a citizen, and on all othercitizens similarly regardless of theirbeliefs.

So, domination works throughpower, but much of this power isactually legitimate power or authority,a large part of which is codified in law.Consent and cooperation are obtainedon a regular and reliable basis becauseof the backing of this structure oflegitimation and formal institutionalsupport. This does not exhaust thedomain of power or domination there are many kinds power that areeffective in society even though theyare illegitimate, or if legitimate are notcodified in law. It is the mix oflegitimate, lawful authority and otherkinds of power that determines thenature of a social system and also itsdynamics.

Contestation, Crime and Violence

The existence of domination, power,legitimate authority and law does notimply that they always meet withobedience and conformity. You havealready read about the presence ofconflict and competition in society. Ina similar way, we need to recognisemore general forms of contestation insociety. Contestation is used here assimply a word for broad forms ofinsistent disagreement. Competitionand conflict are more specific thanthis, and leave out other forms ofdissent that may not be well describedby such terms.

of the teacher does not extend into thehome of the pupil where parents orguardians have primary responsibilityand authority over their children.

There may be other forms ofauthority that are not so strictlydefined, but are nevertheless effectivein eliciting consent and cooperation.A good example is the authoritywielded by a religious leader. Althoughsome institutionalised religions mayhave partly formalised this authority,but the leader of a sect or other less-institutionalised minor religious groupmay wield enormous authoritywithout it being formalised. Similarlyreputed scholars, artists, writers andother intellectuals may wield a lot ofauthority in their respective fieldswithout it being formalised. The sameis true of a criminal gang leader heor she may exercise absolute authoritybut without any formal specifications.

The difference between explicitlycodified and more informal authorityis relevant to the notion of the law. Alaw is an explicitly codified norm orrule. It is usually written down, andthere are laws that specify how lawsare to be made or changed, or what isto be done if someone violates them.A modern democratic society has agiven body of laws created through itslegislature, which consist of electedrepresentatives. The laws of the landare enacted in the name of the peopleof that land by the peoplesrepresentatives. This law forms theformal body of rules according towhich society will be governed. Lawsapply to all citizens. Whether or not I


One example is that of countercultures among youth or youthrebellion. These are protests againstor refusal to conform to prevalentsocial norms. The content of theseprotests may involve anything fromhairstyles and clothing fashions tolanguage or lifestyle. More standardor conventional forms of contestationinclude elections which are a formof political competition. Contestationsalso include dissent or protest againstlaws or lawful authorities. Open anddemocratic societies allow this kind ofdissent to different degrees. There areboth explicit and implicit boundariesdefined for such dissent; crossingthese boundaries invites some form ofreaction from society, usually from thelaw enforcement authorities.

As you know very well, beingunited as Indians does not prevent usfrom disagreeing with each other.Different political parties may havevery different agendas even thoughthey may respect the sameConstitution. Belief in or knowledgeof the same set of traffic rules doesnot prevent heated arguments on theroad. In other words, social order neednot mean sameness or unanimity. Onthe other hand, how much differenceor dissent is tolerated in society is animportant question. The answer tothis question depends on social andhistorical circumstances but it alwaysmarks an important boundary insociety, the boundary between thelegitimate and the illegitimate, thelegal and the illegal, and theacceptable and the unacceptable.

Although it generally carries astrong moral charge, the notion ofcrime is strictly derived from the law.A crime is an act that violates anexisting law, nothing more, nothingless. The moral worth of the act is notdetermined solely by the fact that itviolates existing law. If the existing lawis believed to be unjust, for example,a person may claim to be breaking itfor the highest moral reasons. This isexactly what the leaders of theFreedom Movement in India weredoing as part of their CivilDisobedience campaign. WhenMahatma Gandhi broke the salt lawof the British government at Dandi,he was committing a crime, and hewas arrested for it. But he committedthis crime deliberately and proudly,and the Indian people were also proudof him and what he stood for. Ofcourse, these are not the only kindsof crime that are committed! There aremany other kinds of crime that cannotclaim any great moral virtue. But theimportant point is that a crime is thebreaking of the law going beyondthe boundary of legitimate dissent asdefined by the law.

The question of violence relates atthe broadest level to the basic definitionof the state. One of the defining featuresof the modern state is that it issupposed to have a monopoly over theuse of legitimate violence within itsjurisdiction. In other words, only thestate (through its authorisedfunctionaries) may lawfully useviolence all other instances ofviolence are by definition illegal. (There


are exceptions like self defense meantfor extraordinary and rare situations).Thus, technically, every act of violenceis seen as being directed against thestate. Even if I assault or murder someother individual, it is the state thatprosecutes me for violating itsmonopoly over the legitimate use ofviolence.

It is obvious that violence is theenemy of social order, and an extremeform of contestation that transgressesnot only the law, but important socialnorms. Violence in society is theproduct of social tensions andindicates the presence of seriousproblems. It is also a challenge to theauthority of the state. In this sense italso marks the failure of the regime oflegitimation and consent and the openoutbreak of conflicts.

SOCIAL ORDER AND CHANGE IN VILLAGE,TOWN AND CITY

Most societies can be divided into ruraland urban sectors. The conditions oflife and therefore the forms of socialorganisation in these sectors are verydifferent from each other. So also,therefore, are the forms of social orderthat prevail in these sectors, and thekinds of social change that are mostsignificant in each.

We all think we know what ismeant by a village and by a town orcity. But how exactly do wedifferentiate between them? (see alsothe discussion in Chapter 5 on VillageStudies in the section onM.N. Srinivas). From a sociologicalpoint of view, villages emerged as part

of the major changes in socialstructure brought about by thetransition from nomadic ways of lifebased on hunting, gathering food andtransient agriculture to a more settledform of life. With the development ofsedentary forms of agriculture orforms that did not involve moving fromplace to place social structure alsochanged. Investment in land andtechnological innovations inagriculture created the possibility ofproducing a surplus something overand above what was needed forsurvival. Thus, settled agriculturemeant that wealth could beaccumulated and this also broughtwith it social differences. The moreadvanced division of labour alsocreated the need for occupationalspecialisation. All of these changestogether shaped the emergence of thevillage as a population settlementbased on a particular form of socialorganisation.

In economic and administrativeterms, The distinction between ruraland urban settlements is usuallymade on the basis of two major factors:population density and the proportionof agriculture related economicactivities. (Contrary to appearances,size is not always decisive; it becomesdifficult to separate large villages andsmall towns on the basis of populationsize alone.) Thus, cities and townshave a much higher density ofpopulation or the number ofpersons per unit area, such as asquare km than villages. Althoughthey are smaller in terms of absolute


numbers of people, villages are spreadout over a relatively larger area.Villages are also distinguished fromtowns and cities by the larger share ofagricultural activities in theireconomic profile. In other words,villages will have a significantproportion of its population engagedin agriculture linked occupations,much of what is produced there willbe agricultural products, and most ofits income will be from agriculture.

The distinction between a townand city is much more a matter ofadministrative definition. A town andcity are basically the same sort ofsettlement, differentiated by size. Anurban agglomeration (a term used inCensuses and official reports) refersto a city along with its surroundingsub-urban areas and satellitesettlements. A metropolitan areaincludes more than one city, or acontinuous urban settlement manytimes the size of a single city.

Given the directions in whichmodern societies have developed, theprocess of urbanisation has beenexperienced in most countries. Thisis the process by which a progressivelylarger and larger proportion of thecountrys population lives in urbanrather than rural areas. Mostdeveloped countries are nowoverwhelmingly urban. Urbanisationis also the trend in developingcountries; it can be faster or slower,but unless there are special reasonsblocking it, the process does seem tooccur in most contexts. In fact, theUnited Nations reports that by 2007,

for the first time in human history, theworlds urban population willoutnumber its rural population.Indian society is also experiencingurbanisation: the percentage of thepopulation living in urban areas hasincreased from a little less than 11 percent in 1901 to a little more than17 per cent in 1951, soon afterindependence. The 2001 Censusshows that almost 28 per cent of thepopulation now lives in urban areas.

Social Order and Social Change inRural Areas

Because of the objective conditions invillages being different, we can expectthe nature of social order and socialchange to be different as well. Villagesare small in size so they usually permitmore personalised relationships; it isnot unusual for members of a villageto know all or most other members bysight. Moreover, the social structurein villages tends to follow a moretraditional pattern: institutions likecaste, religion, and other forms ofcustomary or traditional socialpractice are stronger here. For thesereasons, unless there are specialcircumstances that make for anexception, change is slower to arrivein villages than in towns.

There are also other reasons forthis. A variety of factors ensure thatthe subordinate sections of societyhave much less scope for expressingthemselves in rural areas than theircounterparts in cities. The lack ofanonymity and distance in the villagemakes it difficult for people to dissent


because they can be easily identifiedand taught a lesson by the dominantsections. Moreover, the relative powerof the dominant sections is much morebecause they control most avenues ofemployment, and most resources of allkinds. So the poor have to depend onthe dominant sections since there areno alternative sources of employmentor support. Given the small population,it is also very difficult to gather largenumbers, particularly since effortstowards this cannot be hidden from thepowerful and are very quicklysuppressed. So, in short, if there is astrong power structure already in placein a village, it is very difficult to dislodgeit. Change in the sense of shifts inpower are thus slow and late to arrivein rural areas because the social orderis stronger and more resilient.

Change of other sorts is also slowto come because villages are scatteredand not as well connected to the restof the world as cities and towns are.Of course, new modes of communication,particularly the telephone and thetelevision have changed this. So thecultural lag between villages andtowns is now much shorter or non-existent. Communication links ofother sorts (road, rail) have alsogenerally improved over time so thatfew villages can really claim to beisolated or remote, words oftenunthinkingly attached to villages inthe past. This has also acceleratedthe pace of change somewhat.

For obvious reasons changesassociated with agriculture or withagrarian social relations have a very

major impact on rural societies. Thus,measures like land reform which alterthe structure of land ownership havean immediate impact. In India, thefirst phase of land reforms afterindependence took away proprietaryrights from absentee landlords andgave them to the groups that wereactually managing the land and itscultivation in the village. Most of thesegroups belonged to intermediatecastes, and though they were often notthemselves the cultivators, theyacquired rights over land. Incombination with their number, thisfactor increased their social status andpolitical power, because their votesmattered for winning elections. M.N.Srinivas has named these groups asthe dominant castes. In manyregional contexts, the dominant castesbecame very powerful in economicterms and dominated the countrysideand hence also electoral politics. Inmore recent times, these dominantcastes are themselves facingopposition from the assertiveuprisings of castes further below them,the lowest and the most backwardcastes. This has led to major socialupheavals in many states like AndhraPradesh, Bihar, Uttar Pradesh andTamil Nadu.

In the same way, changes in thetechnological organisation ofagriculture also has a large andimmediate impact on rural society.The introduction of new labour savingmachinery or new cropping patternsmay alter the demand for labour andthus change the relative bargaining


strength of different social groups likelandlords and labourers. Even if theydont directly affect labour demand,technological or economic changescan change the economic power ofdifferent groups and thus set inmotion a chain of changes. Suddenfluctuations in agricultural prices,droughts or floods can cause havocin rural society. The recent spate offarmer suicides in India is an exampleof this. On the other hand, large scaledevelopment programmes aimed atthe rural poor can also have anenormous impact. A good exampleof this is the National RuralEmployment Guarantee Act of 2005.

Activity 5

Find out more about the NationalRural Employment Guarantee Act.What does it aim to do? Why is itconsidered such an importantdevelopment programme? Whatproblems does it face? What wouldbe the likely consequences if itsucceeds?

Social Order and Social Change inUrban Areas

It is well known that though the cityitself is very old even ancientsocieties had them urbanism as away of life for large segments of thepopulation is a modern phenomenon.Before the modern era, trade, religionand warfare were some of the majorfactors that decided the location andimportance of cities. Cities that werelocated on major trade routes, or hadsuitable harbours and ports had a

natural advantage. So did cities thatwere well located from the point of viewof military strategy. Finally, religiousplaces attracted large numbers ofpilgrims and thus supported an urbaneconomy. In India too we haveexamples of such old cities, includingthe well known medieval trading townsof Tezpur on the Brahmaputra riverin Assam or Kozhikode (formerlyknown as Calicut) on the Arabian Seain northern Kerala. We also havemany examples of temple towns andplaces of religious pilgrimage, such asAjmer in Rajasthan, Varanasi (alsoknown as Benaras or Kashi) in UttarPradesh, or Madurai in Tamil Nadu.

As sociologists have pointed out,city life and modernity go very welltogether; in fact, each may beconsidered an intimate expression ofthe other. Though it houses large andvery dense populations, and though ithas been known throughout history asthe site for mass politics, the city is alsothe domain of the modern individual.In its combination of anonymity andthe amenities and institutions that onlylarge numbers can support, the cityoffers the individual boundlesspossibilities for fulfillment. Unlike thevillage, which discourages individualityand cannot offer much, the citynurtures the individual.

But while the many artists, writers,and scholars who have celebrated thecity as the haven of the individual arenot wrong, it is also true that freedomand opportunity are available only tosome individuals. More accurately,only a socially and economically


privileged minority can have the luxuryof a predominantly free and fulfillinglife. Most people who live in cities haveonly limited and relative freedomswithin larger constraints. These arethe familiar economic and socialconstraints imposed by membership insocial groups of various kinds, alreadyknown to you from the previouschapter. The city, too, fosters thedevelopment of group identities based on factors like race, religion,ethnicity, caste, region, and of courseclass which are all well representedin urban life. In fact, the concentrationof large numbers in a relatively smallspace intensifies identities and makesthem integral to strategies of survival,resistance and assertion.

Most of the important issues andproblems of social order in towns andcities are related to the question ofspace. High population density placesa great premium on space and createsvery complex problems of logistics. Itis the primary task of the urban socialorder to ensure the spatial viability ofthe city. This means the organisationand management of things like:housing and residential patterns; masstransit systems for transporting largenumbers of workers to and from work;arranging for the coexistence ofresidential, public and industrial land-use zones; and finally all the publichealth, sanitation, policing, publicsafety and monitoring needs of urbangovernance. Each of these functions

A doctor checking a patient


is a huge undertaking in itself andpresents formidable challenges ofplanning, implementation andmaintenance. What adds to thecomplexity is that all of these taskshave to be performed in a contextwhere the divisions and tensions ofclass, ethnicity, religion, caste and soon are also present and active.

For example, the question of urbanhousing brings with it a whole host ofproblems. Shortage of housing for thepoor leads to homelessness, and thephenomenon of street people thosewho live and survive on the streets andfootpaths, under bridges and flyovers,abandoned buildings and other emptyspaces. It is also the leading cause forthe emergence of slums. Thoughofficial definitions vary, a slum is acongested, overcrowded neighbourhood

with no proper civic facilities(sanitation, water supply, electricityand so on) and homes made of allkinds of building materials rangingfrom plastic sheets and cardboard tomulti-storeyed concrete structures.Because of the absence of settledproperty rights of the kind seenelsewhere, slums are the naturalbreeding ground for dadas andstrongmen who impose their authorityon the people who live there. Controlover slum territory becomes thenatural stepping stone to other kindsof extra-legal activities, includingcriminal and real estate-related gangs.

Where and how people will live incities is a question that is also filteredthrough socio-cultural identities.Residential areas in cities all over theworld are almost always segregated by

A girl child looking after the sibling


A commercial centre in a city

Women at work in cotton field


class, and often also by race, ethnicity,religion and other such variables.Tensions between such identities bothcause these segregation patterns andare also a consequence. For example,in India, communal tensions betweenreligious communities, most commonlyHindus and Muslims, results in theconversion of mixed neighbourhoodsinto single-community ones. This inturn gives a specific spatial pattern tocommunal violence whenever it erupts,which again furthers the ghettoisation

process. This has happened in manycities in India, most recently in Gujaratfollowing the riots of 2002. Theworldwide phenomenon of gatedcommunities is also found in Indiancities. This refers to the creation ofaffluent neighbourhoods that areseparated from their surroundings bywalls and gates, with controlled entryand exit. Most such communities alsohave their own parallel civic facilities,such as water and electricity supply,policing and security.

Various kinds of transport in an urban area


Shopping in a city


Activity 6

Have you come across such gatedcommunities in your town or city,or in one you have visited? Find outfrom your elders about such acommunity. When did the gates andfences come up? Was there anyopposition, and if so by whom? Whatreasons might people have forwanting to live in such places? Whateffects do you think it has on urbansociety and on the neighbourhoodssurrounding it?

Finally, housing patterns arelinked to the economy of the city incrucial ways. The urban transportsystem is directly and severely affectedby the location of residential areasrelative to industrial and commercialworkplaces. If these are far apart, asis often the case, an elaborate masstransit system must be created andmaintained. Commuting becomes away of life and an ever present sourceof possible disruption. The transportsystem has a direct impact on thequality of life of working people in thecity. Reliance on road transport andspecially on private rather than publicmodes (i.e., cars rather than buses)creates problems of traffic congestionand vehicular pollution. As will beclear to you from the above discussion,the apparently simple issue ofdistribution of living space is actuallya very complex and multi-dimensionalaspect of urban society.

Daily long distance commuters canbecome an influential politicalconstituency and sometimes developelaborate sub-cultures. For example,the sub-urban trains of Mumbai popularly known as locals havemany informal associations ofcommuters. Collective on-trainactivities include singing bhajans,celebrating festivals, choppingvegetables, playing card and boardgames (including tournaments), orjust general socialising.

The form and content of socialchange in urban areas is also bestunderstood in relation to the centralquestion of space. One very visibleelement of change is the ups anddowns experienced by particularneighbourhoods and localities. Acrossthe world, the city centre or the corearea of the original city has had manychanges of fortune. After being thepower centre of the city in the 19thand early 20th century, the city centrewent through a period of decline in thelatter half of the 20th century. Thiswas also the period of the growth ofsuburbs as the af fluent classesdeserted the inner city for the suburbsfor a variety of reasons. City centresare experiencing a revival now in manymajor western cities as attempts toregenerate community life and the artsbear fruit. A related phenomenon isgentrification, which refers to theconversion of a previously lower classneighbourhood into a middle and


upper class one. As real estate pricesrise, it becomes more and moreprofitable for developers to try andeffect such a conversion. At somepoint, the campaign becomes self-fulfilling as rental values increase andthe locality acquires a criticalminimum of prosperous businessesand residents. But sometimes theeffort may fail and the neighbourhoodgoes back down the class scale andreturns to its previous status.

Activity 7

Have you noticed any gentrificationor up-scaling taking place in yourneighbourhood? Do you know ofsuch instances? Find out what thelocality was like before thishappened. In what ways has itchanged? How have these changesaffected different social groups andclasses? Who benefits and wholoses? Who decides about changesof this sort is there voting, or someform of public discussion?

Changes in modes of masstransport may also bring aboutsignificant social change in cities.Affordable, efficient and safe publictransport makes a huge difference tocity life and can shape the socialcharacter of a city apart frominfluencing its economic fortunes.Many scholars have written on thedifference between cities based onpublic transport like London or NewYork and cities that depend mainlyon individualised car -basedtransport like Los Angeles. It remainsto be seen, for example, whether thenew Metro Rail in Delhi wil lsignificantly change social life in thatcity. But the main issue regardingsocial change in cities, specially inrapidly urbanising countries likeIndia, is how the city will cope withconstant increase in population asmigrants keep streaming in to addto its natural growth.

GLOSSARY

Customs Duties, Tariffs: Taxes imposed on goods entering or leaving a country,which increase its price and make it less competitive relative to domesticallyproduced goods.

Dominant Castes: Term attributed to M.N. Srinivas; refers to landowningintermediate castes that are numerically large and therefore enjoy politicaldominance in a given region.

Gated Communities: Urban localities (usually upper class or affluent) sealedoff from its surroundings by fences, walls and gates, with controlled entryand exit.

Gentrification: The term used to describe the conversion of a low class (urban)neighbourhood into a middle or upper class neighbourhood


Ghetto, Ghettoisation: Originally from the term used for the locality where Jewslived in medieval European cities, today refers to any neighbourhood with aconcentration of people of a particular religion, ethnicity, caste or other commonidentity. Ghettoisation is the process of creation of ghettoes through the conversionof mixed composition neighbourhoods into single community neighbourhoods.

Legitimation: The process of making legitimate, or the grounds on whichsomething is considered legitimate, i.e., proper, just, right etc.

Mass Transit: Modes of fast city transport for large numbers.

EXERCISES

1. Would you agree with the statement that rapid social change is a comparativelynew phenomenon in human history? Give reasons for your answer.

2. How is social change to be distinguished from other kinds of change?

3. What do you understand by structural change? Explain with examples otherthan those in the text.

4. Describe some kinds of environment-related social change.

5. What are some kinds of changes brought about by technology and the economy?

6. What is meant by social order and how is it maintained?

7. What is authority and how is it related to domination and the law?

8. How are a village, town and city distinguished from each other?

9. What are some features of social order in rural areas?

10. What are some of the challenges to social order in urban areas?

REFERENCES

GIDDENS, Antony. Sociology. 4th edition.

GERTH, HANS and C. WRIGHT MILLS. (eds) from Max Weber.

KHILNANI, SUNIL. 2002. The Idea of India, Penguin Books, New Delhi.

Patel, Sujata and Kushal Deb (eds). 2006. Urban Sociology (Oxford in India)Readings in Sociology and Social Anthropology series). Oxford UniversityPress, New Delhi.

SRINIVAS, M.N. Social Change in Modern India.

Understanding Sociology Chapter Two

Documents

Transcript of Understanding Sociology Chapter Two