nological grown with advanced capitalism in the case of many Western thinkers, and to socialism and finally communism in the case of Marxist ideology.2 It is, however, interesting to note that in each case a certain progress is inherent, and for a society to be developmentally advanced, it must go through certain preconceived stages based on patters of growth assumed to be correct. Developmentally, this means an Industrial Revolution, which, if analyzed in much of the literature, focuses not on development outside of politics, but the linkage with economics and monetary growth. In most cases, then, the paradigm for political growth is inexorably linked with the Western cap
1 See Samuel P. Huntington, "Political Development and Political Decay," from World Politics 17 (1965): 386 430, in Reading 6, 104 138.
2 Myron Weiner and Samuel P. Huntington, eds., Understanding Political Development, (New York: Little, Brown, 1987), 3 9. italistic nations, and proceeds from the assumption that the process of development, while certainly speeded up, must still occur along Western lines.3
Since, political "development implies change in the direction of realizing potential [it is] broadly conceived [as] a property of all political systems. . .."4 Economically, development seems also tied with a broadening of the political spectrum, particularly as evidenced in the Third World. Because European nations expanded in both political and economic influence at least by the sixteenth century, and since the evolution of transportation and communication have provided a model of development,5 it follows that many nations seeking to rapidly bridge the gap between their economic and political system would attempt to emulate the Western model.
In the study of political economy, it is thus hard to completely differentiate the processes of political and economic development, particularly when the stages that appear to be common to countries on th...