Page 231 - DSOC201_SOCIAL_STRUCTURE_AND_SOCIAL_CHANGE_ENGLISH

Social Structure and Social Change

Notes state control of the means of industrial production. The government’s approach to private enterprise
and to the role of the state in industrial development was indicated in Industries Development and
Regulation Act which provided that no new industrial unit or substantial expansion of existing plants
could be made without a license from the Central Government. This rule was, however, liberalized in
the economic policy adopted by the government in 1992.
10.1 Concept and Meaning of Social Change

Social change has been understood and defined in many different ways. This is due to differences in
perceptions and perspective of the concept and variation in labeling weightage to the idea and nature
of social change. However, it is generally agreed among sociologists that the focus in the discourse of
social change is the aspect of occurrence of significant alterations in the organization and/or structure
and functions of social life rather than the regular, short term, and predictable reoccurrences.
We shall attempt a working definition of social change. The definition incorporates the aspects of
significant changes in the various patterns of social relationships social processes, social patterns,
action and interaction, the rules of relationships and conduct (norms), values, symbols and cultural
products. The concept of social change also refers to variations over time in both the material and
non-material aspects of culture. These changes take place both from within the societies
(endogenousforces) and from without (exogenousforces) that is brought about by external forces.
The concept of social transformation is very closely related to that of social change. Social
transformation is a relatively new term that has gained some popularity in the recent decades in
the discourse of the social sciences. In fact, social transformation is a radical form of social change.
It is a more abrupt change of a society and/or state, usually with a larger scale, through agents such
as revolution. The concept connotes the idea of a particularly deep and far-reaching change that
alters the way of life of the people within a limited span of time. Social change is on the other hand
essentially concerned with minor and persistent changes in the social organization and/or social
structure of a society such as changes brought about in the patterns of family, marriage, and
educational institution. In the following discussion, we shall use social change as connoting both
the persistent changes (social change) and the radical and abrupt changes (social transformation)
unless specific mention is made.
10.2 Goals of Social Change

At the time of political independence of the country, many intellectuals felt that India had failed to
modernize itself not because it lacked the wherewithal to develop but it had been the victim of capitalist
imperialism. The socio-cultural transformation we had initiated four and a half decades ago and the
one which we want to plan for the coming decades aims at structural changes which could meet the
emerging needs and aspirations of the people. The collective goals we had planned to achieve in the
very first decade of the republic were social, economic, political and cultural. The social goals were:
equality, justice, freedom, rationality, and individualism. The economic goals include: distributive
justice and economic rationalism in place of economic theology. The political goals were: establishing
a political system where the ruler is accountable to the ruled, decentralization of political power, and
associating more and more people with the decision-making processes. Our cultural goal was a change
from the sacred to the secular ideology.
The goals given by out power elites were:
• To create a strong central state: This was necessary because historically, political authority in
India had been fragmented. After independence, it was feared that the religious, linguistic,
caste, tribal, class, etc. forces may further attempt to fragment authority. Strong federal
government with some authority to state governments alone would thwart attempts of such
fragmentation.
• To modernize the economy: This was necessary for raising the low per capita income, for
making the country self-reliant, and for having an indigenous capital goods sector which is not
dependent on foreign private capital.
• To create a socialist pattern of society: This was necessary to restrict, but not eliminate, the role
of private capitalists and emphasize public ownership of major industries.

226 LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY