We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 November 2008
One of the most common themes in the literature on political development is the assumption of an elite—mass gap based on differing educational, occupational, income and social class backgrounds. The saliency of such differences are presumed to be more important in developing than developed nations because of an overlay of Westernization to be found in the elite sectors and a strong traditional orientation among the masses, particularly the rural masses. Urban dwellers are often thought of as residing in a transitional limbo between the old and the new, between a disintegrating traditional self-identity and an emerging modern one.
1 Huntington, Samuel P., Political Order in Changing Societies (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1968).Google Scholar
2 Weiner, Myron, ‘India: Two Political Cultures,’ in Pye, Lucian and Verba, Sidney (eds), Political Culture and Political Development (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1965), pp. 199–244.Google Scholar
3 Morris-Jones, W. H., ‘India's Political Idioms,’ in Cyril, Henry Philips (ed.), Politics and Society in India (London: George Allen and Unwin, 1963), pp. 133–54.Google Scholar
4 Franda, Marcus, ‘The Political Idioms of Atulya Ghosh,’ Asian Survey 6 (08 1966), pp. 420–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5 Kothari, Rajni, Politics in India (Boston: Little, Brown, 1970).Google Scholar
6 Nandy, Ashis, ‘The Culture of Indian Politics.’ Journal of Asian Studies 30 (11 1970), pp. 57–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7 Lloyd, Rudolph and Susanne, H. Rudolph, The Modernity of Tradition (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1967)Google Scholar, and Milton, Singer, When a Great Tradition Modernizes (New York: Praeger, 1972).Google Scholar
8 Rudolph and Rudolph, The Modernity of Tradition, and Srinivas, M. N., ‘The Cohesive Role of Sanskritization,’ in Philip, Mason (ed.), India and Ceylon: Unity and Diversity (London: Oxford University Press, 1967), pp. 67–83.Google Scholar
9 Percival, Spear, ‘The Position of the Muslims, Before and After Partition,’ in Mason, India and Ceylon, pp. 30–150.Google Scholar
10 On single variable discriminations, a sample size of 525 permits assertions to the effect that we are 95 percent sure of being within 4 percent of the true mean.
11 For a presentation of the semantic differential technique see Osgood, Charles E., Suci, George J. and Tannenbaum, Percy H., The Measurement of Meaning (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1957). Essentially it involves taking a concept such as ‘Socialism’, and asking respondents to rank it on several nine point continuums, such as good-bad, or kind-cruel.Google Scholar
12 The statistics reported in Tables 1 and 2 were generated using the breakdown subprogram of SPSS, version 5.01.
13 Now that the initial exploration of hypothesis one has been completed it can fairly be argued that any new research should sharpen the political environment attributes that are measured across groups. For example, instead of using the basic building blocks of caste, wealth and party, attention should focus on such things as majority rule, equality before the law and competitive elections—concepts which may bring into sharper relief tensions between traditional and modern political ualues.Google Scholar
14 Abelson, R. and Tukey, W., ‘Efficient Conversion of Non-Metric Information,’ in Edward, Tufte (ed.), The Quantitative Analysis of Social Problems (Reading: Addison-Wesley, 1970), pp. 407–17.Google Scholar
