New technology is an important source of social change. (Social change refers to any significant alteration over time in behavioral patterns and cultural values ​​and norms.) Since modernization involves social transformation from agrarian to industrial societies, it is important to look at the technological point of view; However, new technologies do not change societies by themselves. Rather, it is the response to the technology that causes change. Technology is often recognized but not used for a long time, such as the ability to extract metal from rock. [citation needed] Although it was not initially used, it later had profound implications for the development of societies. Technology makes possible a more innovative society and broad social change. That dramatic change over the centuries that has evolved socially, industrially and economically, can be summarized with the term modernization. Cell phones, for example, have changed the lives of millions of people around the world. This is especially true in Africa and other parts of the Middle East, where low-cost communication infrastructure exists. With cell phone technology, widely dispersed populations are connected, facilitating business-to-business communication and providing internet access to more remote areas, with a consequent increase in literacy.[1]​.

The crisis of modernity and its transformation into a single thought after the fall of the Berlin Wall (1989) has provoked an increasing debate on the subject. Added to the increase in interest in ecology and other paradigmatic revolutions (feminine, political, ethnicism, etc.), modernization is no longer understood as a telos, a kind of industrial paradise, but is also critically analyzed, with the idea of ​​homogeneous development also being abandoned in many places. The devastation of Africa, the stagnation of Latin America and the entrenchment of part of Asia are examples of this, not to mention the internal crises that first world countries are experiencing. In current theories, we can cite the works of Immanuel Wallerstein and his world-system theory, which understands the tendency to globalize processes without resolving inequalities and social risks. Many of these theses are taken up by anti-globalization and environmentalist movements and can also be linked by more aggressive theses against capitalism such as those of Michael Hardt or Antonio Negri.

Fundamental Characteristics of Modernization Theory.

The fundamental characteristics of the theory can be summarized as follows:

Based on the approach of growth in stages, the theory of modernization is reinforced with the formalization of post-Keynesian dynamic models. The doctrines of vicious circles and neoclassical models of structural change, which for some authors constitute the first heterodoxies, as well as the debate between balanced and unbalanced growth, complete the detailed description of the theory of modernization.[2]​.

The period before the 1930s is commonly called the period of social exclusion and the oligarchic State, in reference to the broad powers concentrated in a small circle of the population.

During the first three decades of the century, the social demands of vast sectors of the population sharpened as the beginning of a modernization process in which the growth of cities boosted the development of a series of social mobilizations that culminated in the dismemberment of the traditional oligarchic order. The country was the scene of the action of a broad multi-class social movement in which large civic marches, the "marchs against hunger", as well as proposals for new policies and reforms of an economic and social nature were intermingled along with guidelines for a new political constitution.

In this social framework, the diversity of family forms that has taken root since the beginning of the Chilean nation-state has been treated by some authors as "the disorder of the family."

If there is a distinctive feature in contemporary works on modernization, it is its methodical analysis of the ecological crisis, globalization and its consequences and the structural crisis of modernity in a historical moment called postmodernity or reflective modernity, depending on the methodological approach. In other words, the destruction of the utopia of the promises of modernization. It was Ulrich Beck with Sociology of Risk (1986) who, from a more optimistic perspective, raised the alarm to rethink social study and that the ideologies of the past could no longer explain the world on their own, due to ecological damage, the labor crisis, nascent feminism, cultural change among other phenomena. From a more critical perspective, a series of social and intellectual movements have joined in who call for the end of neoliberalism or, in some cases, of the capitalist system itself.

Political modernization manifests itself at the following levels: At the level of population, political system and government subsystem.

It has three features:

• Equality: It is based on the step taken from a generalized condition of subjects to a condition of people increasingly united with each other, at this point it is accompanied by the right to vote and political participation.

• Capacity: Refers to the "capacity" of the authorities, when it increases to be able to direct public affairs, control social tensions and face all the demands of the members of the system.

-Freedom: Refers to the independence of the person to choose their ideology, religion, etc.

• Differentiation: There is a greater and notable integration of institutions and organizations.[4]​.

Along with the transformations produced in the economic sphere, transformations are seen in the social sphere, since economic modernization tends to better organize the productive capabilities and potential of a society.

Labor begins to not be used as much, due to the mechanization of the agricultural sector, labor is replaced by machines; Urban conglomerates are created; Literacy was necessary, since operating a machine was complicated, they had to have knowledge to be able to work in factories and be able to better use resources.

To bring people from the countryside to the city takes away all the possibilities of progress and leading a normal life:.

The fencing law is enacted, which forces citizens who live in the countryside to move to the city, because they do not have access to the entire land of their countryside but to a part and in that way they could not have their crops, since for this they needed space. Thus, criminals appear. They were also promised better working conditions and possibilities for advancement in the city. Thus they began to move from the countryside to the city.[1][5]​

KEY POINTS IN THE MODERNIZATION OF PUBLIC MANAGEMENT

State Planning: Have clear, defined and aligned objectives. The projects must be assumed as debtors over time, using State policies and not just government ones. As an example we have macroeconomic guidelines such as fiscal, tax and relative price stability (inflation and exchange rate).

Budget for results: implies that a State allocates its budget according to certain achievements, which are based on the demands of citizens. For example, local governments can be granted greater resources as long as they meet some proposed objectives.

Globalization can be defined as the integration of economic, political and social cultures. It is argued that globalization is related to the spread of modernization across borders.

Global trade has grown continuously since the European discovery of new continents in the early modern period; it increased particularly as a result of the Industrial Revolution and the mid-century adoption of the shipping container.

Annual cross-border tourist arrivals rose to 456 million in 1990 and have almost tripled since then, reaching a total of more than 1.2 billion in 2016.[6]​[7]​ Communication is another important area that has grown due to modernization. The communication industries have allowed capitalism to spread throughout the world. Telephony, television broadcasting, news services and online service providers have played a crucial role in globalization. Former United States President Lyndon B. Johnson was a supporter of modernization theory and believed that television had the potential to provide educational tools in development.[8]​.

With the many positive attributes apparent to globalization there are also negative consequences. The dominant neoliberal model of globalization often increases disparities between a society's rich and its poor.[9]​ In the main cities of developing countries there are pockets where modernized world technologies, computers, cell phones and satellite television, exist alongside extreme poverty. Globalists are globalization modernization theorists and argue that globalization is positive for everyone, as its benefits must ultimately extend to all members of society, including vulnerable groups such as women and children.

That the new (modern) machines in the industries are cheaper and use less materials, which increases the economy, but by using few materials they become practically disposable, since it was easier to invest in the machines that facilitated the development of the companies, thus generating a more feasible income and faster work in less time.

This gave rise to all companies being more competitive, resulting in products being lower but with quality, giving rise to the capitalist spirit.[10]​.

Contenido

Hay distintos tipos de crisis:.

1. Crisis de Penetración y de Integración: se refieren al proceso a través del cual nace un Estado más o menos centralizado. Este Estado trata de extender y reforzar su autoridad, penetrando en los distintos sectores de la sociedad y logrando que los centros de poderes locales lo obedezcan.

2. Crisis de la Identidad y Legitimidad: se refieren al proceso a través del cual los ciudadanos llegan a obedecer las leyes emanadas del Estado, a aceptarlas como justas y a sentirse parte de la comunidad política.

3. Crisis de Participación: aparece cuando se amplía el ámbito de los individuos que pretenden formar parte en las decisiones políticas.

4. Crisis de Distribución: afecta las modalidades del empleo de los poderes gubernativos para hacer transferencia de riquezas entre los ciudadanos y para distribuir bienes, servicios, valores y oportunidades.[2].

Democratization and Modernization

The relationship between modernization and democracy is one of the most researched studies in comparative politics. There is an academic debate about the drivers of democracy because there are theories that support economic growth as a cause and effect of the institution of democracy. "Lipset's observation that democracy is related to economic development, first in 1959, has generated the largest body of research on any topic in comparative politics" (Przeworski and Limongi, 1997).

Larry Diamond and Juan Linz, who worked with Lipset on the book "Democracy in Developing Countries: Latin America," argue that economic performance affects the development of democracy in at least three ways. First, they argue that economic growth is more important for democracy than given levels of socioeconomic development. Second, socioeconomic development generates social changes that can facilitate democratization. Third, socioeconomic development promotes other changes, such as the organization of the middle class, which is conducive to democracy.[11]​.

As Seymour Martin Lipset put it, "All the various aspects of economic development (industrialization, urbanization, wealth, and education) are so closely related to each other that they form an important factor that has the political correlate of democracy."[12] The argument also appears in Walt W. Rostow, "Politics and the Stages of Growth" (1971); A. F. K. Organski, The stages of political development (1965); and David Apter, "The Politics of Modernization" (1965). In the 1960s, some critics argued that the link between modernization and democracy relied too much on the example of European history and neglected the Third World.[13] Recent manifestations of the emergence of democracy in South Korea, Taiwan, and South Africa have been cited as support for Lipset's thesis.

A historical problem with that argument has always been Germany whose economic modernization in the century occurred long before democratization after 1918. However, Berman concludes that a process of democratization was taking place in imperial Germany: "During these years, the Germans developed many of the habits and customs that political scientists now think portend healthy political development."[14]

Ronald Inglehart and Christian Welzel (2009) argue that the realization of democracy is not based solely on a desire expressed for that form of government, but that democracies are born as a result of the mixture of certain social aspects and cultural factors. They argue that the ideal social and cultural conditions for the founding of a democracy are born from significant modernization and economic development that translates into massive political participation.[15]​.

Peerenboom (2008) explores the relationships between democracy, the rule of law, and their relationship to wealth by pointing to examples of Asian countries, such as Taiwan and South Korea, that have successfully democratized only after economic growth reached relatively high levels and examples of countries such as the Philippines, Bangladesh, Cambodia, Thailand, Indonesia, and India, which sought to democratize at lower levels of wealth but have not done so well.[16]

Adam Przeworski and others have challenged Lipset's argument. They say political regimes do not transition to democracy as per capita income increases. Rather, democratic transitions occur randomly, but once there, countries with higher levels of gross domestic product per capita remain democratic. Epstein et al. (2006) retests the modernization hypothesis using new data, new techniques, and a three-way, rather than dichotomous, classification of regimes. Contrary to Przeworski, this study finds that the modernization hypothesis holds up well. Partial democracies emerge as one of the most important and least understood regime types.

Highly debatable is the idea that modernization means more human rights, with China in the century an important test case.

El proceso de Modernización se inicia 20 años después de la independencia, estos años son difíciles. Pero después de 1940 las cosas empiezan a asentarse un poco, se introducen elementos modernos, pero también externos como puede ser la vestimenta, las mujeres conservan la vestimenta clásica mientras que los hombres empiezan a vestir a la francesa.

La modernización no es solo un proceso, el deseo de la superación, mayor uso de la tecnología, continuidad, estos son elementos comunes que presenta la modernización.

There are 3 types of modernization

Legal capitalist modernization, characterized by turning everything upside down, begins with a new social class that begins to have power and new ideas, and is competent with different factors of society.

Traditionalist modernization, part of a traditional society that modernizes itself, this society imports modernizing values ​​and technologies, yet continues to retain some traditional values.

Socialist modernization is more [17]​ well directed by the State and on the other hand with a very strong ingredient, such as the sense of equality between people.

New technology is an important source of social change. (Social change refers to any significant alteration over time in behavioral patterns and cultural values ​​and norms.) Since modernization involves social transformation from agrarian to industrial societies, it is important to look at the technological point of view; However, new technologies do not change societies by themselves. Rather, it is the response to the technology that causes change. Technology is often recognized but not used for a long time, such as the ability to extract metal from rock. [citation needed] Although it was not initially used, it later had profound implications for the development of societies. Technology makes possible a more innovative society and broad social change. That dramatic change over the centuries that has evolved socially, industrially and economically, can be summarized with the term modernization. Cell phones, for example, have changed the lives of millions of people around the world. This is especially true in Africa and other parts of the Middle East, where low-cost communication infrastructure exists. With cell phone technology, widely dispersed populations are connected, facilitating business-to-business communication and providing internet access to more remote areas, with a consequent increase in literacy.[1]​.

The crisis of modernity and its transformation into a single thought after the fall of the Berlin Wall (1989) has provoked an increasing debate on the subject. Added to the increase in interest in ecology and other paradigmatic revolutions (feminine, political, ethnicism, etc.), modernization is no longer understood as a telos, a kind of industrial paradise, but is also critically analyzed, with the idea of ​​homogeneous development also being abandoned in many places. The devastation of Africa, the stagnation of Latin America and the entrenchment of part of Asia are examples of this, not to mention the internal crises that first world countries are experiencing. In current theories, we can cite the works of Immanuel Wallerstein and his world-system theory, which understands the tendency to globalize processes without resolving inequalities and social risks. Many of these theses are taken up by anti-globalization and environmentalist movements and can also be linked by more aggressive theses against capitalism such as those of Michael Hardt or Antonio Negri.

Fundamental Characteristics of Modernization Theory.

The fundamental characteristics of the theory can be summarized as follows:

Based on the approach of growth in stages, the theory of modernization is reinforced with the formalization of post-Keynesian dynamic models. The doctrines of vicious circles and neoclassical models of structural change, which for some authors constitute the first heterodoxies, as well as the debate between balanced and unbalanced growth, complete the detailed description of the theory of modernization.[2]​.

The period before the 1930s is commonly called the period of social exclusion and the oligarchic State, in reference to the broad powers concentrated in a small circle of the population.

During the first three decades of the century, the social demands of vast sectors of the population sharpened as the beginning of a modernization process in which the growth of cities boosted the development of a series of social mobilizations that culminated in the dismemberment of the traditional oligarchic order. The country was the scene of the action of a broad multi-class social movement in which large civic marches, the "marchs against hunger", as well as proposals for new policies and reforms of an economic and social nature were intermingled along with guidelines for a new political constitution.

In this social framework, the diversity of family forms that has taken root since the beginning of the Chilean nation-state has been treated by some authors as "the disorder of the family."

If there is a distinctive feature in contemporary works on modernization, it is its methodical analysis of the ecological crisis, globalization and its consequences and the structural crisis of modernity in a historical moment called postmodernity or reflective modernity, depending on the methodological approach. In other words, the destruction of the utopia of the promises of modernization. It was Ulrich Beck with Sociology of Risk (1986) who, from a more optimistic perspective, raised the alarm to rethink social study and that the ideologies of the past could no longer explain the world on their own, due to ecological damage, the labor crisis, nascent feminism, cultural change among other phenomena. From a more critical perspective, a series of social and intellectual movements have joined in who call for the end of neoliberalism or, in some cases, of the capitalist system itself.

Political modernization manifests itself at the following levels: At the level of population, political system and government subsystem.

It has three features:

• Equality: It is based on the step taken from a generalized condition of subjects to a condition of people increasingly united with each other, at this point it is accompanied by the right to vote and political participation.

• Capacity: Refers to the "capacity" of the authorities, when it increases to be able to direct public affairs, control social tensions and face all the demands of the members of the system.

-Freedom: Refers to the independence of the person to choose their ideology, religion, etc.

• Differentiation: There is a greater and notable integration of institutions and organizations.[4]​.

Along with the transformations produced in the economic sphere, transformations are seen in the social sphere, since economic modernization tends to better organize the productive capabilities and potential of a society.

Labor begins to not be used as much, due to the mechanization of the agricultural sector, labor is replaced by machines; Urban conglomerates are created; Literacy was necessary, since operating a machine was complicated, they had to have knowledge to be able to work in factories and be able to better use resources.

To bring people from the countryside to the city takes away all the possibilities of progress and leading a normal life:.

The fencing law is enacted, which forces citizens who live in the countryside to move to the city, because they do not have access to the entire land of their countryside but to a part and in that way they could not have their crops, since for this they needed space. Thus, criminals appear. They were also promised better working conditions and possibilities for advancement in the city. Thus they began to move from the countryside to the city.[1][5]​

KEY POINTS IN THE MODERNIZATION OF PUBLIC MANAGEMENT

State Planning: Have clear, defined and aligned objectives. The projects must be assumed as debtors over time, using State policies and not just government ones. As an example we have macroeconomic guidelines such as fiscal, tax and relative price stability (inflation and exchange rate).

Budget for results: implies that a State allocates its budget according to certain achievements, which are based on the demands of citizens. For example, local governments can be granted greater resources as long as they meet some proposed objectives.

Globalization can be defined as the integration of economic, political and social cultures. It is argued that globalization is related to the spread of modernization across borders.

Global trade has grown continuously since the European discovery of new continents in the early modern period; it increased particularly as a result of the Industrial Revolution and the mid-century adoption of the shipping container.

Annual cross-border tourist arrivals rose to 456 million in 1990 and have almost tripled since then, reaching a total of more than 1.2 billion in 2016.[6]​[7]​ Communication is another important area that has grown due to modernization. The communication industries have allowed capitalism to spread throughout the world. Telephony, television broadcasting, news services and online service providers have played a crucial role in globalization. Former United States President Lyndon B. Johnson was a supporter of modernization theory and believed that television had the potential to provide educational tools in development.[8]​.

With the many positive attributes apparent to globalization there are also negative consequences. The dominant neoliberal model of globalization often increases disparities between a society's rich and its poor.[9]​ In the main cities of developing countries there are pockets where modernized world technologies, computers, cell phones and satellite television, exist alongside extreme poverty. Globalists are globalization modernization theorists and argue that globalization is positive for everyone, as its benefits must ultimately extend to all members of society, including vulnerable groups such as women and children.

That the new (modern) machines in the industries are cheaper and use less materials, which increases the economy, but by using few materials they become practically disposable, since it was easier to invest in the machines that facilitated the development of the companies, thus generating a more feasible income and faster work in less time.

This gave rise to all companies being more competitive, resulting in products being lower but with quality, giving rise to the capitalist spirit.[10]​.

Contenido

Hay distintos tipos de crisis:.

1. Crisis de Penetración y de Integración: se refieren al proceso a través del cual nace un Estado más o menos centralizado. Este Estado trata de extender y reforzar su autoridad, penetrando en los distintos sectores de la sociedad y logrando que los centros de poderes locales lo obedezcan.

2. Crisis de la Identidad y Legitimidad: se refieren al proceso a través del cual los ciudadanos llegan a obedecer las leyes emanadas del Estado, a aceptarlas como justas y a sentirse parte de la comunidad política.

3. Crisis de Participación: aparece cuando se amplía el ámbito de los individuos que pretenden formar parte en las decisiones políticas.

4. Crisis de Distribución: afecta las modalidades del empleo de los poderes gubernativos para hacer transferencia de riquezas entre los ciudadanos y para distribuir bienes, servicios, valores y oportunidades.[2].

Democratization and Modernization

The relationship between modernization and democracy is one of the most researched studies in comparative politics. There is an academic debate about the drivers of democracy because there are theories that support economic growth as a cause and effect of the institution of democracy. "Lipset's observation that democracy is related to economic development, first in 1959, has generated the largest body of research on any topic in comparative politics" (Przeworski and Limongi, 1997).

Larry Diamond and Juan Linz, who worked with Lipset on the book "Democracy in Developing Countries: Latin America," argue that economic performance affects the development of democracy in at least three ways. First, they argue that economic growth is more important for democracy than given levels of socioeconomic development. Second, socioeconomic development generates social changes that can facilitate democratization. Third, socioeconomic development promotes other changes, such as the organization of the middle class, which is conducive to democracy.[11]​.

As Seymour Martin Lipset put it, "All the various aspects of economic development (industrialization, urbanization, wealth, and education) are so closely related to each other that they form an important factor that has the political correlate of democracy."[12] The argument also appears in Walt W. Rostow, "Politics and the Stages of Growth" (1971); A. F. K. Organski, The stages of political development (1965); and David Apter, "The Politics of Modernization" (1965). In the 1960s, some critics argued that the link between modernization and democracy relied too much on the example of European history and neglected the Third World.[13] Recent manifestations of the emergence of democracy in South Korea, Taiwan, and South Africa have been cited as support for Lipset's thesis.

A historical problem with that argument has always been Germany whose economic modernization in the century occurred long before democratization after 1918. However, Berman concludes that a process of democratization was taking place in imperial Germany: "During these years, the Germans developed many of the habits and customs that political scientists now think portend healthy political development."[14]

Ronald Inglehart and Christian Welzel (2009) argue that the realization of democracy is not based solely on a desire expressed for that form of government, but that democracies are born as a result of the mixture of certain social aspects and cultural factors. They argue that the ideal social and cultural conditions for the founding of a democracy are born from significant modernization and economic development that translates into massive political participation.[15]​.

Peerenboom (2008) explores the relationships between democracy, the rule of law, and their relationship to wealth by pointing to examples of Asian countries, such as Taiwan and South Korea, that have successfully democratized only after economic growth reached relatively high levels and examples of countries such as the Philippines, Bangladesh, Cambodia, Thailand, Indonesia, and India, which sought to democratize at lower levels of wealth but have not done so well.[16]

Adam Przeworski and others have challenged Lipset's argument. They say political regimes do not transition to democracy as per capita income increases. Rather, democratic transitions occur randomly, but once there, countries with higher levels of gross domestic product per capita remain democratic. Epstein et al. (2006) retests the modernization hypothesis using new data, new techniques, and a three-way, rather than dichotomous, classification of regimes. Contrary to Przeworski, this study finds that the modernization hypothesis holds up well. Partial democracies emerge as one of the most important and least understood regime types.

Highly debatable is the idea that modernization means more human rights, with China in the century an important test case.

El proceso de Modernización se inicia 20 años después de la independencia, estos años son difíciles. Pero después de 1940 las cosas empiezan a asentarse un poco, se introducen elementos modernos, pero también externos como puede ser la vestimenta, las mujeres conservan la vestimenta clásica mientras que los hombres empiezan a vestir a la francesa.

La modernización no es solo un proceso, el deseo de la superación, mayor uso de la tecnología, continuidad, estos son elementos comunes que presenta la modernización.

There are 3 types of modernization

Legal capitalist modernization, characterized by turning everything upside down, begins with a new social class that begins to have power and new ideas, and is competent with different factors of society.

Traditionalist modernization, part of a traditional society that modernizes itself, this society imports modernizing values ​​and technologies, yet continues to retain some traditional values.

Socialist modernization is more [17]​ well directed by the State and on the other hand with a very strong ingredient, such as the sense of equality between people.