Blog About All

Among the many political and social changes that took place ensuing World War II the colonial states declared their independence. As Samuel Huntington describes in “Political Order in Changing Societies” these communities faced many hardships and are still undergoing the difficulties associated with gaining independence. Tension becomes increasingly severe with the topics of ethnicity, language, region, tradition, and religion. Turmoil regarding these issues ultimately undermines political stability and the ability of new states to effectively govern citizens through a legitimate political institution. The fundamental challenges that new states face are extensive social change accompanied by rapid modernization; especially when insufficient concern is given for establishing firm political institutions.

The post-colonial states of Asia, Africa, and Latin America are generally complex, heterogeneous societies and therefore rely heavily on a functional political institution. In the preliminary stages of nation-building, social forces play a pivotal role. Social forces include ethnic, religious, economic, and regional groups. Ideally Huntington’s political institution governs the problems that can arise from the clashing of interests among these social groups. An example where social forces can be at odds is illustrated through Israel and its Arab neighbor. In this instance religious groups are fighting a battle over the holy land. There are also numerous ethnic clashes including the civil war in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. In The Integrative Revolution Clifford Geertz feels “As the new states solidify politically, such disputes may well grow both more frequent and more intense” (Geertz pg. 116). In many post-colonial instances where independence is juvenile, power seems to be there for the taking. To determine how their state will be run and where the power resides conflict and violence among social groups erupts in the form of civil wars and coup de etats. If not controlled, social forces will continue quarrel and eventually one side will become dominate. Alternatively both sides could continue fighting years of stagnant wars like Israel and Arabia. Either way a prosperous state with a stable democracy will be an unlikely outcome.

In the post-colonial states, there is a fine line between how much power social forces ought to have; it is imperative though the government be the dominant power. If social forces have too much power and not enough respect for the sovereign there is no allegiance to the country. Political decay, which consists of slow development of political institutions, poor economic gaps, and shortages in the political community will surely ensue as a result of overpowering social forces. As Rupert Emerson notes in Nation Building, the African communities, particularly tribes, pose a significant problem to the establishment of independent states. “It is evident that the traditional tribal system is not readily compatible with the new and perhaps incipiently national state structures” (Emerson 98). This is a formidable challenge for states who encounter these communities that resist to succumb to the nationalist movement. One instance of this is shown in the Hausa-Fulani tribe of northern Nigeria who were not submissive to the southerners’ pressure for rapid political advancement. Tribalism can be overcome in two manners according to Emerson you can utilize them as the foundation of what your nation is built on, or eradicate them as efficiently as possible. Nigeria is a positive example of a country that has been able to incorporate opposing tribes into their political scheme. Of course obstacles in on the road to independence are not limited to tribes; economic, religious, and regional groups all can and have halted post-colonial movements towards a unifying national identity and fundamentally sound government. If these revolts grow large enough they can disrupt the entire process of nation-building and even overthrow the government.

Among many other interests creating a national identity is a primary objective for post-colonial states. With so many social forces overlapping and competing for power this can be difficult. To get many people with many diverse views to believe in one common goal is quite a task. First off, it takes time to establish a national identity. This is obviously something that Africa has not had in comparison to the rest of the globe. Emerson goes as far to say that colonialism was detrimental to the national movement by intentionally turning tribes against one another and dividing nations (Emerson 105). The new states also lack a revolutionary revolt in which bonds and loyalty are established. Most of the colonial powers failed to maintain a respectable hold on sovereignty. Needless to say when independence is so easily obtained not many ties are incurred. Another method that could be employed in attempts to promote nationalism is through formal education. Once again another challenge surfaces when accounting for the immense level of illiteracy in these modernizing nations.

Language also undermines attempts to create a national identity. There remains a ‘social bond of inestimable value’ with regards to people who speak common languages (Emerson, 113). The African post-colonial states create a formidable wall between one another considering there are is a vast array of languages. There are over 250 different languages spoken in Nigeria alone. It is extremely challenging to replace a nation’s linguistic lines in moral viewpoint; an example can be seen in 1948 (newly independent) Andhra. “…horrified or not, [Nehru, Patel, and Sitaramayya] in the end were forced to endorse the claims of Andhra as a Telugu-speaking state…” (Geertz, 106). In this example Nehru and many of his countrymen were distressed as they felt a language represented culture, race, and history. This is a true statement making it all the more difficult to generate national identity in a country full of diversity.

The speedy process of modernization can also have adverse effects on a newly independent state. There are two types of modernization, the first being social mobilization. Defined, social mobilization is the process of bringing people into modern society. This shift can be in attitude, values and also expectation. An example of this is the man migrating from small villages and farms into urban dwellings. Associated with the interaction of mass media, education, and urbanization is a change in traditional mindset. Problems with this can arise through alienation and anomie. For instance, while modernization may bring many rural people to the city in search of opportunity they may be sorely disappointed in what they find. In attempts to escape from their lackluster lives migrators may be overcome with feelings of alienation in a world so distant from theirs. Improvements in education and literacy increase aspirations and when these are not fulfilled people are left disgruntled with the political system and their nation. This is a catalyst for increased political participation and demands that leads to even more political decay. With increased urbanization also comes new contact with diverse people. This fuels prejudism and can lead to group conflict. There is often hostility bridging over social class with modern educated people resenting the traditional ignorance; this is known as the modernization-violence paradox (Huntington 39).

The other form of modernization is through economic development or total output of a society. Through economic progress the state can take on more roles including welfare, and jobs amongst the bureaucracy. Without a secure political institution this can disrupt traditional authorities. As we see in Latin America, there is a positive relationship between the frequency of revolutions and the level of economic development (Huntington, 44). Only one of the six poor countries and five of the 14 wealthier countries experienced insurgencies meaning economic development may lead to instability. An example of this is a leader who already has ample power and wealth; why would he/she relinquish their monopoly of power for equality. This can lead to corruption, rebellion and even coup de etats. We can also reach what is called the state capacity; when people are demanding more than the government can provide. When a state becomes modernized there should be a general acceptance of a common authority. As mentioned early, in multi-faceted cultures this can pose a problem as many groups neglect to recognize any external sovereignty.

The key to a successful transition from colonial powers to independence relies on the increased consideration on political organization and institutions. Focusing on establishing a concrete system of governance is the real solution to all of these aforementioned problems. Huntington cites The Federalist, No. 51, “the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.” The political institution should take precedence over social forces, social mobilization, and economic development. As we saw with conflicts in social forces, political institution is necessary in a complex society where individual interests vary from one person to the next. When the development of state lags behind social interests and economic development we have instability. Furthermore, a political institution needs to have adaptability, complexity, autonomy and coherence (Huntington 12). Adaptability is the ability of the institution to conform to the changing facets of society. Adaptability gives the institution the ability to persist past man and provide a practical system for the next generation. It should also be complex in the way that it can organize many sub units. If one process is void it can more aptly adjust itself and still be functional. The most simplistic political systems are known as tyrannies and therefore undesirable. Huntington also suggests that the longer an institution has been established, the more likely it is to persist. Autonomy refers to the ability to cater to multiple social forces which prevents corruption. Lastly, coherence is concerning the institution’s unity and is closely tied with autonomy. For this reason, the newly independent state’s implemented institutions have a significantly lower likelihood of success.

When creating an institution one should make sure that its interests coincide with the public’s interests. There needs to exist a certain degree of trust among citizens with each other and the sovereign alike. Mutual trust allows people to create relationships, work together, and avoid the qualms associated with post-colonial independent states i.e. corruption, disorganization, and self-interest. George Lodge notes that Latin America is without mutual trust and is therefore a “motivation-organization vacuum” which makes democracy difficult and economic development sluggish (Huntington 31).

As we can see the most prominent challenge nation-builders face when modernizing post-colonial states is the broad spectrum of social forces. As the processes involve with modernization advance, so does the contact between these heterogeneous societies. Without a distinct concentration placed on political institutions to mediate these conflicts, instability is inevitable. We as Americans often overlook the value of strong political institution because we have had great success with ours. Our process of modernization was dispersed over several centuries and therefore issues could be dealt with before they were exacerbated. With the budding independence throughout Latin America, Africa, and Asia, Huntington’s priority of a political institution before modernization seems to be the most viable prescription for prosperity.

Among the many political and social changes that took place ensuing World War II the colonial states declared their independence. As Samuel Huntington describes in “Political Order in Changing Societies” these communities faced many hardships and are still undergoing the difficulties associated with gaining independence. Tension becomes increasingly severe with the topics of ethnicity, language, region, tradition, and religion. Turmoil regarding these issues ultimately undermines political stability and the ability of new states to effectively govern citizens through a legitimate political institution. The fundamental challenges that new states face are extensive social change accompanied by rapid modernization; especially when insufficient concern is given for establishing firm political institutions.

The post-colonial states of Asia, Africa, and Latin America are generally complex, heterogeneous societies and therefore rely heavily on a functional political institution. In the preliminary stages of nation-building, social forces play a pivotal role. Social forces include ethnic, religious, economic, and regional groups. Ideally Huntington’s political institution governs the problems that can arise from the clashing of interests among these social groups. An example where social forces can be at odds is illustrated through Israel and its Arab neighbor. In this instance religious groups are fighting a battle over the holy land. There are also numerous ethnic clashes including the civil war in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. In The Integrative Revolution Clifford Geertz feels “As the new states solidify politically, such disputes may well grow both more frequent and more intense” (Geertz pg. 116). In many post-colonial instances where independence is juvenile, power seems to be there for the taking. To determine how their state will be run and where the power resides conflict and violence among social groups erupts in the form of civil wars and coup de etats. If not controlled, social forces will continue quarrel and eventually one side will become dominate. Alternatively both sides could continue fighting years of stagnant wars like Israel and Arabia. Either way a prosperous state with a stable democracy will be an unlikely outcome.

In the post-colonial states, there is a fine line between how much power social forces ought to have; it is imperative though the government be the dominant power. If social forces have too much power and not enough respect for the sovereign there is no allegiance to the country. Political decay, which consists of slow development of political institutions, poor economic gaps, and shortages in the political community will surely ensue as a result of overpowering social forces. As Rupert Emerson notes in Nation Building, the African communities, particularly tribes, pose a significant problem to the establishment of independent states. “It is evident that the traditional tribal system is not readily compatible with the new and perhaps incipiently national state structures” (Emerson 98). This is a formidable challenge for states who encounter these communities that resist to succumb to the nationalist movement. One instance of this is shown in the Hausa-Fulani tribe of northern Nigeria who were not submissive to the southerners’ pressure for rapid political advancement. Tribalism can be overcome in two manners according to Emerson you can utilize them as the foundation of what your nation is built on, or eradicate them as efficiently as possible. Nigeria is a positive example of a country that has been able to incorporate opposing tribes into their political scheme. Of course obstacles in on the road to independence are not limited to tribes; economic, religious, and regional groups all can and have halted post-colonial movements towards a unifying national identity and fundamentally sound government. If these revolts grow large enough they can disrupt the entire process of nation-building and even overthrow the government.

Among many other interests creating a national identity is a primary objective for post-colonial states. With so many social forces overlapping and competing for power this can be difficult. To get many people with many diverse views to believe in one common goal is quite a task. First off, it takes time to establish a national identity. This is obviously something that Africa has not had in comparison to the rest of the globe. Emerson goes as far to say that colonialism was detrimental to the national movement by intentionally turning tribes against one another and dividing nations (Emerson 105). The new states also lack a revolutionary revolt in which bonds and loyalty are established. Most of the colonial powers failed to maintain a respectable hold on sovereignty. Needless to say when independence is so easily obtained not many ties are incurred. Another method that could be employed in attempts to promote nationalism is through formal education. Once again another challenge surfaces when accounting for the immense level of illiteracy in these modernizing nations.

Language also undermines attempts to create a national identity. There remains a ‘social bond of inestimable value’ with regards to people who speak common languages (Emerson, 113). The African post-colonial states create a formidable wall between one another considering there are is a vast array of languages. There are over 250 different languages spoken in Nigeria alone. It is extremely challenging to replace a nation’s linguistic lines in moral viewpoint; an example can be seen in 1948 (newly independent) Andhra. “…horrified or not, [Nehru, Patel, and Sitaramayya] in the end were forced to endorse the claims of Andhra as a Telugu-speaking state…” (Geertz, 106). In this example Nehru and many of his countrymen were distressed as they felt a language represented culture, race, and history. This is a true statement making it all the more difficult to generate national identity in a country full of diversity.

The speedy process of modernization can also have adverse effects on a newly independent state. There are two types of modernization, the first being social mobilization. Defined, social mobilization is the process of bringing people into modern society. This shift can be in attitude, values and also expectation. An example of this is the man migrating from small villages and farms into urban dwellings. Associated with the interaction of mass media, education, and urbanization is a change in traditional mindset. Problems with this can arise through alienation and anomie. For instance, while modernization may bring many rural people to the city in search of opportunity they may be sorely disappointed in what they find. In attempts to escape from their lackluster lives migrators may be overcome with feelings of alienation in a world so distant from theirs. Improvements in education and literacy increase aspirations and when these are not fulfilled people are left disgruntled with the political system and their nation. This is a catalyst for increased political participation and demands that leads to even more political decay. With increased urbanization also comes new contact with diverse people. This fuels prejudism and can lead to group conflict. There is often hostility bridging over social class with modern educated people resenting the traditional ignorance; this is known as the modernization-violence paradox (Huntington 39).

The other form of modernization is through economic development or total output of a society. Through economic progress the state can take on more roles including welfare, and jobs amongst the bureaucracy. Without a secure political institution this can disrupt traditional authorities. As we see in Latin America, there is a positive relationship between the frequency of revolutions and the level of economic development (Huntington, 44). Only one of the six poor countries and five of the 14 wealthier countries experienced insurgencies meaning economic development may lead to instability. An example of this is a leader who already has ample power and wealth; why would he/she relinquish their monopoly of power for equality. This can lead to corruption, rebellion and even coup de etats. We can also reach what is called the state capacity; when people are demanding more than the government can provide. When a state becomes modernized there should be a general acceptance of a common authority. As mentioned early, in multi-faceted cultures this can pose a problem as many groups neglect to recognize any external sovereignty.

The key to a successful transition from colonial powers to independence relies on the increased consideration on political organization and institutions. Focusing on establishing a concrete system of governance is the real solution to all of these aforementioned problems. Huntington cites The Federalist, No. 51, “the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.” The political institution should take precedence over social forces, social mobilization, and economic development. As we saw with conflicts in social forces, political institution is necessary in a complex society where individual interests vary from one person to the next. When the development of state lags behind social interests and economic development we have instability. Furthermore, a political institution needs to have adaptability, complexity, autonomy and coherence (Huntington 12). Adaptability is the ability of the institution to conform to the changing facets of society. Adaptability gives the institution the ability to persist past man and provide a practical system for the next generation. It should also be complex in the way that it can organize many sub units. If one process is void it can more aptly adjust itself and still be functional. The most simplistic political systems are known as tyrannies and therefore undesirable. Huntington also suggests that the longer an institution has been established, the more likely it is to persist. Autonomy refers to the ability to cater to multiple social forces which prevents corruption. Lastly, coherence is concerning the institution’s unity and is closely tied with autonomy. For this reason, the newly independent state’s implemented institutions have a significantly lower likelihood of success.

When creating an institution one should make sure that its interests coincide with the public’s interests. There needs to exist a certain degree of trust among citizens with each other and the sovereign alike. Mutual trust allows people to create relationships, work together, and avoid the qualms associated with post-colonial independent states i.e. corruption, disorganization, and self-interest. George Lodge notes that Latin America is without mutual trust and is therefore a “motivation-organization vacuum” which makes democracy difficult and economic development sluggish (Huntington 31).

As we can see the most prominent challenge nation-builders face when modernizing post-colonial states is the broad spectrum of social forces. As the processes involve with modernization advance, so does the contact between these heterogeneous societies. Without a distinct concentration placed on political institutions to mediate these conflicts, instability is inevitable. We as Americans often overlook the value of strong political institution because we have had great success with ours. Our process of modernization was dispersed over several centuries and therefore issues could be dealt with before they were exacerbated. With the budding independence throughout Latin America, Africa, and Asia, Huntington’s priority of a political institution before modernization seems to be the most viable prescription for prosperity.