Page images

as to standards of living and human dignity. Even without industrialization, developing areas have long been part of the world market economy, confronted with the problems of selling raw materials and buying increasing amounts of manufactured goods. Population pressure has contributed to existing social and economic structures, making them unsatisfactory for meeting traditional needs. The conclusion is that those who continue to stress cultural resistance to change, the stability of preindustrial societies, and the futility of schemes for economic development have overlooked the revolution that has engulfed the developing areas. To a considerable degree, labor protest is against the failure to industrialize at a pace in keeping with population growth and rising aspirations, rather than a protest against the impact of industrialization on existing cultures.

Although reforms that do not involve industrialization are necessary to remove the causes of agrarian unrest, industrialization remains fundamental to the solution. Without industrialization there will be continued underemployment and unemployment; a farm labor surplus will cause further fragmentation of land holdings and soil erosion; without income from productive employment, there will be continued malnutrition accompanied by lowered resistance to disease; city slums will continue to grow. An unproductive economy cannot supply the amenities now demanded. A labor surplus encourages low wages and poor personnel practices, and impedes the breaking down of racial and caste distinctions. Continued population pressure on the land, due to failure to industrialize, puts the landlord and the moneylender in favorable bargaining positions; and continued dependence on raw material exports for money income renders the entire economy unstable.

The critical class in developing areas is made up of middle-class intellectuals, who are not only dissatisfied with their social and economic status, but provide the leadership of unions, political parties, and reform movements. Ideologically, they find themselves in the difficult position of (a) praising native culture as nationalists while condemning it as Western-educated reformers and planners, and (b) endorsing Western technology while condemning its association with colonialism and capitalism. The unrest of the middle class is a force for economic development, but the institutional framework within which it occurs depends on which ideology gains the ascendancy among the middle class. Types of labor unrest that can be directly attributed to the industrialization process are those resulting from: (a) problems of adjustment to industrial discipline, (b) undermining of the traditional cul

ture, (c) lack of a secure stake and status in industrial society on the part of the new recruit to industry, (d) technological unemployment, (e) imbalance in economic growth, and (f) industrial grievances that are complicated by a labor surplus and authoritarian management traditions. Three points should be emphasized regarding the impact of industrialization: (1) Much industrial unrest is not so much the consequence of industrialization itself as of the attempt to preserve a preindustrial way of life in an inappropriate environment. (2) Industrial unrest is not so much the result of workers' devotion to traditional values as of industrialization in an environment that does not permit the worker to become a full-fledged industrial citizen. (3) The problems created by industrialization are exceeded by those arising from the inability of countries to industrialize as rapidly as their people desire. Although industrial conflict will develop from efforts to adjust to changing values, there will be even more unrest unless industrialization is encouraged.

The rapid growth of trade unionism since World War II is not a product of industrial unrest, but rather of unrest stemming from nonindustrial causes. The type of unionism that developed in response to the problems of industrialization in the West is ill-suited to the problems of the developing areas, which encourage a pattern of unionism under middle-class leadership. The unions are loosely organized, with few paying members; tied to political parties and concerned with political issues to the neglect of the workers' problems on the job; fragmented and subject to extreme jurisdictional rivalry; and subject to government regulation of the bargaining process. Nevertheless, these unions are capable of exerting influence on employers and governments through strikes, rioting, and demonstrations. If trade unionism may be defined as an organized movement of wage earners with the objective of furthering workers' interests, the term does not describe most “unions" in developing areas. They may be described more aptly as heterogeneous masses of peasants, wage earners, sharecroppers, and unemployed who are momentarily loyal to a particular middle-class leader or group of leaders.

In spite of the difficulties confronting unions in developing areas, job-oriented unions have much to contribute to the welfare of workers and to economic development. Unions cannot solve the problems of the peasant, the tenant farmer, and the unemployed, but can modify the effects of general unemployment and of feudalism on the terms of employment in industrial and nonindustrial jobs. Such unions can pro

mote economic development by correcting abuses in personnel policies, by forcing management to become efficient, by giving status and a sense of belonging to the recruit to industry, and by avoiding politically motivated labor disputes. Unionism that is job conscious, however, requires free collective bargaining, which may lead to serious strikes and inflationary wage-price spirals—a luxury that developing areas may not afford. The job-oriented pattern of unionism, under the influence of governments or of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions has operated successfully in both the industrial and nonindustrial sectors of developing areas; but, because of workers' inexperience with unionism and politically oriented middle-class leadership, it is not now the dominant pattern.

Unionism is a foreign institution imported to control, channel, or take advantage of labor unrest. In the contest to shape the destinies of the developing areas many groups, other than the workers themselves, have sought to influence or control the nature of union development. There are, however, no laws for predicting the pattern that unions in developing areas may eventually follow. If the older forms of government and social structure are replaced by chaos in which rival middleclass groups struggle for power, unions may become increasingly fragmented and politically oriented. With political stability and economic progress, unions may become adjuncts of political parties, agencies of the state, or welfare divisions of corporate personnel departments.

The situation in many developing areas indicates that industrialization will be governmentally sponsored under middle-class nationalist management. Accordingly, there is a possibility that dependent unionism may become the dominant pattern. Although dependent unionism may solve many personnel problems in an honest and paternalistic autocracy, the working class is left without full industrial citizenship and without protection against the abuse of power. Although the environment of developing areas is not the best for the cultivation of jobconscious unionism, its cultivation by the governments of developing areas may help shape the environment.



Manning Nash

This paper has a twofold objective: to explain the role of familial and kinship organization in the emergence and commitment of an industrial labor force in peasant and primitive societies, and to stipulate the grounds of development of those voluntary associations capable of playing a positive part in the structuring of a labor force suitable for sustained economic development. The procedure is to expound as much of a general conceptual scheme as is relevant for this objective and from that perspective to examine closely two rather well documented cases. One case is a Guatemalan Indian community which has relatively easily adopted a factory. The other is the difficult experience with industrial transformation in British East Africa, especially around Jinja. Empirical material is selected from studies of these widely divergent cultures, with the expectation that a set of extremes can be approximated as alternative paths to industrial commitment. The concluding statements attempt to provide the basis of a general understanding of the role of kinship and voluntary organizations in the process of labor force commitment in preindustrial, non-Western societies.


General Kinship Characteristics

Kinship systems are a means of ordering and specifying social relations. A kinship system is a set of rules establishing behaviors, rights and duties, attitudes and sentiments between persons who are designated by special terms or by symbols which indicate the legitimacy of the reciprocal activities and sentiments involved. Kinship systems differ from one another in their range, i.e., whether the number of persons tied together by kin bonds is wide or narrow, and in the method by which they extend kin links-bilateral, unilineal, or double descent system.1 It is agreed that kinship systems are determined by

1 A. R. Radcliffe-Brown, "The Study of Kinship Systems," in his Structure and Function in Primitive Society (Glencoe: Free Press, 1952), pp. 49-89; Radcliffe-Brown

the general features of the social organization,2 and that the latter is in part a response to other aspects of social life, particularly technology, pattern of residence, economic system, and the distribution of wealth and power.3

The social units, or groupings, based on kinship vary in size, structure, and function from society to society and over time. The family is a kinship group which combines socialization of the young, economic reciprocity without regard to price or other advantage, co-residence of sexually associating adults, and reproduction. Other social entities may carry on similar functions, but the family is the social unit that combines these four. The form and function of the family and of the kinship system may be referred to as the domestic aspect of social organization. Analysis of this aspect is made from the perspective of the individual, and shows the kinship system's range, its method of ordering relations, its repertory of behaviors and sentiments, its rules of family duty, and its domestic and household features. Such an analysis enables the investigator to say what the web of kinship is for a given society at a given time and to specify the relative equilibrium of its tissue of kin connections.

Some societies utilize kinship for the structuring of social units whose tasks are political, economic, ceremonial, ritual, or military in the strict sense. These kinship groupings are lineages, clans, and dual organizations. Analysis of these social entities is made from the point of view of the total social system. This is a different level of analysis and shows what may be called the "web of clanship," to distinguish the tasks of kinship groupings in a total social system from those of kinship groupings at the domestic and familial level.5

Corporate Kinship and Industrial Labor

The emergence of a labor force means a change in the tasks that a social system is carrying on and therefore a change in the basis of and C. Daryll Forde, eds., African Systems of Kinship and Marriage (New York: Oxford University Press, 1950).

2 Meyer Fortes, "The Structure of Unilineal Descent-Groups," American Anthropologist, 55:17-41 (January-March 1953); G. P. Murdock, Social Structure (New York: Macmillan Company, 1949).

3 Fred Eggan, Social Organization of the Western Pueblos (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1950); Fortes, op. cit.; Murdock, op. cit.; Radcliffe-Brown and Forde, op. cit.

4 Murdock, op. cit., p. 3.

5 Fortes, op. cit.

« PreviousContinue »