Defensive Modernization: Creating and Destroying Modern Nations
Defensive modernization has a double meaning. The first meaning is that a nation westernized its ways in order to better fit into a modern society by using nearby resources. For example, nations may have utilize agricultural techniques in order to better utilize its food supply or advance its military to better suit its government’s agenda. However, defensive modernization’s second definition means that a nation sacrifices its culture for the sake of economic and wartime survival, depending on the reaction from its citizens. This is called diffusion (Curtin 132). That being said, when a nation, however, decides to ignore a known resource for some time, it still keeps its culture (for the time being). This is called nondiffusion (134). Curtin alludes to how various countries have modernized at the expense of their cultures. A nation can either diffuse to better fit into modern society and lose its identity or not diffuse and maintain its cultural heritage, but fall behind economically. Defensive modernization creates a never-ending circle of cultural sacrifice for the sake of keeping up with trends.
Proselytizing Christians trying to modernize foreign nations could be construed as a form of diffusion. After all, most westernized, prosperous nations practice Christianity. Curtin says, “The Christian missionaries in the past century and a half were inevitably intertwined with the Europeans conquests of that same period. The Christian message often appeared simultaneously with the victory of the Western military and the establishment of European empires” (111). These Christians missionaries were giving the foreign nations the choice if they wanted to be apart of the winning team; the Christian, Western team. As exemplified in Chapter 7, the kingdom of Buganda converted to Christians and gained access to valuable worldly tools such as literature, higher social status, and common spirituality (124). In contrast, African “outsiders” did not benefit the same way the Ganda did after it converted. Several East African nations are still behind economically (not to say Buganda is much better). Additionally, Buganda furthered its transformation when its ruler, Muteska I acquired guns (117). Guns made the Ganda a viable threat to its neighbors and the rising Muslim population. Buganda learned how to leverage in bartering with ivory and slaves (121). In fact, the British even invested in the territory with a railroad because Uganda had the aforementioned resources that Britain didn’t possess. As exemplified by the Neo-Inc resistance, defensive modernization and Christian proselytizing occur happens when a nation is at its most dire state. As Curtin explains, “It was a reaction among members of a society already defeated by alien conquerors” (137). Peru managed to hold off Spain using European military techniques with considerably less manpower. However, this led to the adaptation of the Spanish religion and culture. Initial resistance to a new power inadvertently leads to its ultimate acceptance.
Another example of defensive modernization is Hawaii during the late 18th century; Hawaiin emperor Kamehameha bought some artillery in order to better combat wartime enemies and proved to be a viable competitor against European nations (144). The people loved him for his efforts to make Hawaii stronger and his Europe lauded him for using a foreign resource and modifying it with a cultural item. (He equipped his ancient canoes with state of the art weaponry (144)). Gradually, Hawaii would later combat various nations in their attempts to annex Hawaii. The Kamameha lineage fought off the nations, but in doing so, would gradually diffuse its culture with every experience (144). If a government, military, or other various threats would appear, Hawaii would mirror its opponents’ resource in defensive; in return, Hawaii lost parts of its Polynesian culture each time. Eventually, Hawaii’s monarchial government became modernized in the form of democracy (147). Its Polynesian roots are unrecognizable (148). In a matter of two and a half centuries, Hawaii changed from a tribal society into 50th state of the United States of America: It ultimately became what it fought against.
Siam did westernize, not under-pressure, but by evolution. In the 1800s, King Mongkut noted Western Europe as a potential threat and began to modernize its military. King Chulalongkorn furthered his father King Mongkut’s vision by uniting his people with a new government structure based on Western structure (151). He also improved taxing procedures and public education in order to compete with France and the Malay states and removed Buddhism’s influence from its government, effectively separating church and state (153). The largest change in Siam’s structure was in its military power because of the power of self-defense that it granted. Siam did not become susceptible to the likes of the BEIC or the VOC. This proves that Westernization doesn’t need to have pressure to work, but it is in fact the natural evolution of a nation. By trying so hard not to diffuse, it naturally did so.
Defensive modernization has helped smaller nations stand up to larger Western powers; then, the smaller nations eventually let that small taste of westernization override its sense of national pride and culture. The nation then becomes a smaller version of that larger nation or later sides with it. However, by not diffusing, the nation is at the mercy of the larger nation. Therefore, defensive modernization creates a necessary, never-ending cycle for the survival that at first helps, but ultimately hurts that nation.
No comments:
Post a Comment