Modernity is one of the most contested terms in the present era. There is no fixed definition of modernity. The term modernity is continuously being deconstructed and new meanings are derived sporadically. It is an ambiguous term in a way that no meaning is accepted universally. Various countries or civilizations put forward different characteristics to define what modernity means according to them. However, these characteristics are often antagonistic to each other. Thus, modernity in one place might contest modernity in another. This suggests the multiplicity of modernity. Then the question arises what is modernity? What does it mean to be modern? And if there is no particular sense of modernity and there are multiple modernities then what do we mean by multiple modernities?
We come across the term modernity in our lives almost regularly. Often, countries are compared to each other in terms of modernity. One always gets arguments like the world is more modern than it ever was. Arguments like cities are more modern compared to villages are omnipresent. It shows that the discourse of modernity is everywhere. Thus, the question is, what does it mean to be modern? Or what is modern becomes pertinent. In the most generalized version, modernity can be understood in terms of evolving ideas that keep shaping our world. The new ideas often bring various kinds of changes ranging from society to polity to economy. Keeping in mind what modernity can mean, it is important to note that the path of modernity is not unilinear. In recent years, there have been numerous debates on the utility of modernity. Modernity continues to have an immense impact on global politics. In global politics, dominant actors use particular meanings of modernity to further their agendas. Thus, it becomes pertinent to understand different versions of modernity that could counter the inherent Eurocentrism in the concept of modernity.
Therefore, the concept of multiple modernities becomes important because it brings a non-Western perspective to the concept of modernity and tries to explain the inherent diversity in the paths modernity takes. Modernity has several versions. These versions follow different paths that are based on different contexts. The concept of multiple modernities gives cues about the construction of modernity as a concept. It brings out inherent contradictions and possible points of reconciliation. Multiple modernities theorists reject the traditional ideas of modernization. It brings a critical perspective of modernity and asks us to be vigilant of modern ideas.
The term multiple modernities was first coined by sociologist Schmuel Eisenstadt in the late 1990s who is also the architect of the theory of multiple modernities. According to him, modernity is a constructed experience with historical and cultural contexts. His idea of multiple modernities is against the idea that all societies around the world follow similar trajectories and end up having similar structures and institutions. He argues against the idea that all societies will replicate the West to modernize their societies. The concept of multiple modernities does not accept the idea that modernity is a homogenizing process. The idea that modernity should be measured from the point of the West is untenable. A society does not need to follow the western institutional structure and its ideas to become a modern society from a primitive society.
Western modernity has a particular context and universalizing it does more harm than good. Western ideas of modernity like liberalism, individualism, and secularism cannot be imposed indiscriminately on other societies. As these ideas developed in a particular context and historical background, they may not be sustainable in the case of other societies that have dissimilar cultural and historical backgrounds. It is often misunderstood that westernization and modernity are the same or are interchangeable. It is necessary to distinguish between modernization and westernization. These are two different processes that may never converge in terms of their ideas. A society need not adopt Western values to call itself modern. Hence, context is an important aspect of modernity. Without fully understanding the context, we run the risk of misunderstanding the process of modernization which is often unique to societies. Every civilization, country, or region has different historical and cultural backgrounds and these lead a civilization to a form of modernity that can be seen only in that particular context.
Hence, modernity cannot be universalized. For example, secularism is one of the few characteristics of modern Western societies. In the context of Western societies, secularism means the separation of the state from church (religion). This is a form of Western modernity. According to the Eurocentric view of modernity, if a society has to modernize itself, it needs to follow the European/western version of modernity. By that definition, if one does not follow the European version of modernity, it cannot be called modern. When one talks about the European version of secularism and its relation with modernity, it is not necessary that only European secularism can be considered a part of modernity. Like in the case of India, India is a secular country and also termed as modern. However, it does not follow the Western version of secularism. Its secularism is inherently different compared to Western secularism. Despite that, India is still called a modern country because secularism is the result of its past (colonial and cultural background). By the above example, it is clear that society needs to adhere to Western standards of modernity to be called modern because its historical and cultural background can give rise to different versions of society.
It is often misunderstood that modernity and traditions are always antagonistic to each other. However, when one looks at it closely, it could be said that traditions influence modernity. Traditions give rise to different versions of modernity which are not always against each other. Similarly, the theory of secularization postulates that with modernity, religion will gradually fade away but the concept of multiple modernities counters this argument and suggests that religion can coexist with modernity. E.g. India
Modernity is a dynamic concept and it is always changing, hence defining and redefining modernity is always going on. Now, we come to the question of how does one determine whether the society is modern or not, and what are the roots of modernity? It could be understood by the concept of Axiality (Axial Age). The axial Age concept was given by Karl Jaspers and it can be defined as the age of change in various civilizations and societies with the coming of new ideas. It is that period where new ideas shape the systems and institutions of any society. Eisenstadt uses the concept of the Axiality to explain the Multiple Modernities. According to him, axial age is an important age in human history. It gave rise to multiple axialities which is the start of multiple modernities. It is necessary to note that multiple axialities do not just develop in the historical and cultural background but are also the result of interaction between various civilizations. During interactions, a society might adopt a few elements of other civilizations while giving up some of their own. This might give rise to a different version of modernity. As discussed earlier, modernity has its inherent contradictions. Hence, contradictory interpretations of modernity by different societies might give rise to various conflicts. For example, contradictory versions of nationalism can incite and divide people, leading to violence. Similarly, how terms are defined makes a big difference, like secularism which takes away people’s freedom can be disastrous for society.
Thus, “multiple modernities” is an important concept as it helps to expose the inherent Eurocentrism in the concept of modernity and also deconstructs the term modernity. It brings out new perspectives on modernity and shows that the path to modernity is not unilinear. Modernity should be seen and understood in a historical and cultural context. When comparing the modernities of different civilizations and countries, it is important to keep the context. Various civilizations adapt to modernity in different ways. Hence, modernity is not universal but context-based. That said, ideas of different societies can interact and give rise to a more universal version of modernity.
According to the concept of multiple modernities, Modernity is a social construct moulded by experiences and ideas. Therefore, it is important to deconstruct what it means to be modern. Clinging to particular forms of modernity can show others unmodern irrespective of whether they are modern or not. Therefore, characteristics of modernity can change according to societal contexts. One should look at modernity in the context of society rather than viewing it in the context of other societies.
Frame of Reference 