Page 293 - DSOC201_SOCIAL_STRUCTURE_AND_SOCIAL_CHANGE_ENGLISH

Social Structure and Social Change

Notes Social Movements
A change in collective ideas is not merely an intellectual process; it is often connected to the formation
of new social movements. This in itself might be regarded as a potential cause of social change. Weber
called attention to this factor in conjunction with his concept of “charismatic leadership.” The charismatic
leader, by virtue of the extraordinary personal qualities attributed to him, is able to create a group of
followers who are willing to break established rules. Examples include Jesus, Napoleon, and Hitler.
Recently, however, the concept of charisma has been trivialized to refer to almost any popular figure.
13.6 Industrialisation

Industrialisation got under way in India in the last quarter of the nineteenth and first half of the
twentieth century. Cities grew around the new industries. Before industrialisation, we had (i) agrarian
non-monetised economy, (ii) a level of technology where the domestic unit was also the unit of
economic exchange, (iii) a non-differentiation of occupations between father and son and between
brothers and brothers, and (iv) a value system where authority of the elders and the sanctity of
tradition were both supported as against the criterion of ‘rationality’. But industrialisation has
brought about economic and socio-cultural changes in our society. In the economic field, it has
resulted in specialisation in work, occupational mobility, monetisation of economy, and a breakdown
of link between kinship and occupational structures; in the social field, it has resulted in the migration
of people from rural to urban areas, spread of education, and a strong centralised political structure;
in the cultural field, it has brought secularisation of beliefs.
There have been three important effects of industrialisation on family organisation: First, family
which was a principal unit of production has been transformed into a consumption unit. Instead of
all family members working together in an integrated economic enterprise, a few male members go
out of the home to earn the family’s living. This has affected not only the traditional structure of the
joint family but also the relations among its members. Secondly, factory employment has freed young
adults from direct dependence upon their families. As their wages have made them financially
independent, the authority of the head of the household has weakened further. In the city, in many
cases, along with men, their wives also have started working and earning. This has affected intra-
family relations to some extent. Finally, children have ceased to be economic assets and have become
liabilities. Although in a few cases, the use and abuse of child labour has also increased, law does
not permit children to work. At the same time, educational requirements have increased, lengthening
dependence upon parental support. Accommodation in the cities is expensive and child-care is
demanding. Thus, work and home have become separated due to industrialisation.
Some sociologists have, however, recently challenged the theory of emergence of nuclear families
due to industrialisation. This challenge is based on the results of empirical studies and the
documentation of the variety of family system’, in different parts of the world. Studies by scholars
like M.S.A Kao, M.S. Gore, and Milton Singer have shown that jointness is more preferred and
prevalent in business communities, and many nuclear families maintain widespread kinties. Several
recent researchers in the industrialised West have also emphasised the supportive role of kin and
their function of acting as a buffer between the family and the impersonal wider world (Abbi,
1970). Social historians too have shown that the nuclear family was prevalent as a cultural norm in
Europe and the United States even before industrialisation. However, it has to be noted that the
supportive role of the kin does not have the compulsory character which is found in the family
obligations of the Indian nuclear family. The youngsters in the nuclear family still willingly follow
the normal responsibility towards the primary kin (such as parents and siblings), solidarity of the
close kin, and some sense of unity of the family, even though living in separate households.
All these changes have modified our family system. While the population movement from the rural
to the urban areas has led to decline in authoritarian power, growth of secularism has developed a
value system which emphasises individual initiative and responsibility. Individual now functions
without any restrictive familial controls.

288 LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY