Distinctions between traditional and modern society

Studies on the advantages of modern society over the traditional one

Recently,

distinctions

between

traditional

and

modern

society

remain

to

be

a

heated debate among social scholars. Some of them may think that traditional society

is

superior

to

the

modern

one

as

valuable

experience

and

rich

wisdom,

such

as

traditional culture, are accumulated from within. Having said that, others may reckon

that modern society is the better one for its well-off life, fashion lifestyle, advanced

culture and profound knowledge. Actually, it is true that there are a lot of traditional

legacies that should not be ignored and upon that we should build ourselves. However,

people

may

live

a

more

comfortable

and

well-off

life

in

modern

society.

In

this

connection, the following three distinctions, that is, class status, social economy and

human rights, will be demonstrated in this article as a way to give an explanation.

When it comes to the distinction between traditional and modern society, people

may think of the social

economy

firstly.

Social

economy plays

an important role in

shaping common customs, morality and people

’

s life. When referring to the standards

of judging whether it is developed or not, there is a measure, namely, the scope that its

benefits are able to reach. In traditional society, the social economy is used to serve

the upper class rather than the middle and lower classes. The upper class makes use of

the fruits of economic growth to meet their own greedy desires. While, the majority of

the middle and lower classes are still caught in the tragic life as the demands of the

upper class are met at the cost of the damages of them. It can be seen that the poor

people are in the grips of untold sufferings inflicted by the upper class along with the

economic growth. The social economy had experienced a huge change as a result of

industrial

revolution

in

traditional

society.

At

its

early

stage,

the

family

economy

played a dominant role. In addition,

“

the child was an intrinsic part of the agricultural

and industrial economy before 1780

”

(Thompson,1966, p121). Therefore,

“

the most

prevalent

form

of

child

labor

was

in

the

form

or

within

the

family

economy

”

(Thompson,1966,

p121).

With

the

economic

development,

the

family

economy

was

challenged by factory system. Moreover, the industrial progress brought people apart

from

their

families

and

made

factories

employ

more

child

labors.

People

may

be

misled

if

they

thought

a

prosperous

life

would

come

along

with

more

employment

and economic prosperity. In fact, as the factories gave birth to the specialization and

increasing differentiation of economic roles, children outside the factories to be given

special tasks, at piece-rates which demanded monotonous application for ten, twelve,

or

more

hours

(Thompson,

1966,

p123).

As

for

their

parents,

they

worked

in

the

factories

without the help from their family members and at the cost of integrity of

their families. Their hard work bring in not the higher salary in return but more brutal

oppression

from

their

employers.

In

this

sense,

the

social

economy

in

traditional

society

only

served

the

upper

class

and

brought

the

life

of

the

middle

and

lower

classes from bad to worse. As most of the development gains went to the upper class,

the overall social economy in traditional society can be said underdeveloped.

On the contrary, social economy in modern society remains strong and growing.

Unlike economy in

traditional

society, to

some extent,

it can be said

that the social

economy is developed by the mass, for the mass and its development gains are shared

by

the

mass.

People

have

lived

through

a

great

change

in

their

livelihood

from

a

decent life to a well-off one. They work regular hours a day and they are able to relax

themselves

after

work

without

the

worry

about

the

shortage

of

food

and

obvious,

arbitrary

exploitation.

They

engage

in

the

economic

life

and

enjoy

the

convenience

brought by the economic boom. As such, the trend of mass consumption can serve as

a

measure

to

judge

the

economic

development.

The

so

called

mass

consumption

represents that what is viewed as luxury before is accessible and affordable to most

people. Take the car as an example.

“

Frederick Lewis Allen has observed how hard it

is

for

us

today

to

realize

how

separate

and

distant

communities

were

”

before

the

occurrence of automobile (Bell, 1976, p156). It reflects the great convenience that the

economy growth has brought for us. Before the invention of automobile or at a time

when the car is only exclusive to the rich in traditional society, people can never make

the distance and connection between them become so closer. Thus, one may see that

the social economy in modern society has benefited all the people in the community

where they operate.

As

the

economy

grows,

another

issue

arises,

that

is,

class

issue.

The

relatively

insufficient development of economy leads to the class differentiation.

In traditional

society, development of productive force boosted the occurrence of social division of

labor and surplus value which made the income inequality between the poor and the

rich larger. The upper class sought to gain more surplus value by forcing middle and

lower classes to work longer or strengthening the intensity of the work. The oppressed

class

became

more

and

more

awareness

of

their

common

interests

which

were

opposite from those of rulers and employers. The life of the middle and lower classes

is

poles

from

that

of

upper

class.

The

former

worked

hard

but

failed

to

meet

their

subsistence needs; while the latter, inspired by a greedy heart, made every means to

extract the surplus value from their employees. Such a striking contrast has reflected

the

tragic

life

of

middle

and

lower

classes.

To

make

it

elaborate,

an

example

concerning child labor will be demonstrated as

children, a vulnerable group, always

remain at the bottom of the social class since ancient times. In the traditional society,

children in Britain often worked soon after they were able to walk when the family

economy

prevailed

(Thompson,

1966,

p121).

However,

at

the

time

when

factory

system took the place of family economy, their living standards became arduous, even

brutal. A minister of unidentified affiliations described such a phenomenon as

“

A boy

had been found standing asleep with his arms full of wool and had been beaten awake.

This

day

he

had

worked

seventeen

hours;

he

was

carried

home

by

his

father,

was

unable to eat his supper, awoke at 4 a.m. the next morning and asked his brothers if

they

could

see

the

lights

of

the

mill

as

he

was

afraid

of

being

late,

and

then

died

(Thompson, 1966, p129)

”

.The boy was one of the thousands of poor victims at that

time. It is not hard for people to imagine that a lot of weak, innocent children reduced

to the slaves of upper under long-term merciless oppression. As the desire of upper

class for value is infinite, the richer the upper class turned out to be, the larger the gap

between upper and middle and lower classes would become.

However,

such

the

class

conflicts

gradually

become

weaker

in

modern

society.

Economic development improves the social status of people. Besides, living standards,

humanity

and

morality

have

gained

a

strong

momentum

with

the

help

of

economic