-A social system is composed of many interrelated and interdependent
parts or structures. The social system of India consists of different castes, which each caste assigned or allowed certain functions. The Dahlits do, according to the video, “the jobs the higher castes won’t because they consider them unclean.” One common Dahlit job is as a “manual scavenger,” or cleaning the toilets of upper castes by hand. There are other interrelated and interdependent parts of Indian society. In addition to the Dahlits and higher castes, other parts or structures discussed in the short film include the education system, which the Dahlit activists think is a very important structure in ending the caste system and improving Dahlit lives. The government also features prominently. While the government has outlawed discrimination based on caste, it is still poorly enforced. The government is also an employer of Dahlits, although the jobs Dahlits are given are menial because of the lack of education among the Dahlits.
-The entire system can break down when a change or failure in any one
part of the system affects its interrelated parts. The Indian government recognized and responded to this fear of a system break down when they It is also perhaps a fear of system “break down,” in part, that keeps the higher castes feeling the need to maintain control. While the entire system may not “break down,” it most likely would suffer if the Dahlits could organize mass protests or sit-ins or suddenly cease manual scavenging without warning. Activists advocating for Dahlit rights recognize this and the Prime Minister is interested in maintaining an entire, functioning system. The narrator feels as though the Dahlits are poised to take a stand
-What may be functional in one social structure may not be functional in
another. Several times, the British narrator expresses shock or disgust about the treatment of the Dahlits, as she is clearly not used to the treatment of Dahlits and wishes to convey. The Dahlit activists and documentary crew are relying on the outrageousness of the situation, as seen by primarily British viewers, to fight for change. The Indian prime minister speaks out against discrimination against the Dahlits and recognizes the international view that the caste system is a “blot on humanity.” The narrator discusses India’s growing place on the world stage and suggests that the caste system and treatment of the Dahlits would not be fathomable in a country growing to the prominence on the world stage that India is.
SOCIAL CONFLICT THEORY
-Conflict theory is about the exploitation of one class of people by another class. The entire caste system and treatment of the Dahlits highlights conflict theory excellently. The upper castes exploit the Dahlit. They make them clean up the upper-caste feces by hand, as no other employment is available to them, and use any devices available to them to ensure that they will be able to continue to exploit them. The worst jobs are given to the Dahlits and presumably the worst parts of towns or cities are allotted to the Dahlit. In schools, the least desirable or most shaming tasks are given to the children. Dahlits are not allowed to own land. Even the government encourages the exploitation of the Dahlits, if not on purpose, by allotting 16 percent of government jobs for the Dahlits but allowing these jobs to be mostly menial labor that upper castes would not be willing to perform.
-Those who have or control desirable goods, services, and other resources will defend and protect their own interests at the expense of others. The Dahlits are segregated from the upper castes and prevented from gaining power and resources because the upper castes fear that the lower castes will take their resources and power. In the village the narrator visits first, members of the lower caste are not allowed to go to the large village temple and were physically pushed out. In the municipality where the manual scavenger died while working, apparently from toxic fumes, the chief officer of the municipality who the narrator interviewed claims that no manual scavenging occurs in the municipality. Although he is almost definitely lying because the camera crew is present and manual scavenging is technically outlawed, denying that there is any problem will allow that municipality to continue to exploit the Dahlits and keep them out of power. The narrator interviews the wife of a man who wanted a place on a village council. She tells the narrator the story of her husband’s violent murder at the hands of members of the upper caste and how she was forced to flee after they threatened the lives of her children. The upper caste villagers denied any conflicts between castes in the village.
-These groups are in opposition to one another and, as a result, experience ongoing class conflict. The tension between the Dahlits, fighting for rights and recognition, and the upper castes, often looming in the background and forcing the narrator and film crew to leave areas, was difficult to miss throughout the entire short film. The old woman interviewed near the end of the piece even warned that physical violence might even happen. A large number of Dahlits are murdered, raped or assaulted because of caste. The narrator interviewed multiple Dahlits who were directly affected because of the ongoing class conflict. The government, in some cases, enables this because of a failure to act. The narrator posits that India and the situation of the Dahlit
SYMBOLIC INTERACTION THEORY
-This theory studies individuals within societies, particularly their
definitions and meanings attached to situations. The term for “rat eater” is a particularly loaded term in the documentary. Even among the Dahlits there are structural divisions, with the “rat eaters” occupying the lowest of the low rungs. The young child interviewed was called a “rat eater” by his teacher, which carried great weight and was a harsh and meaningful insult. The documentary opens with a few lines about eating rats, as though that is the best way to stress to the viewers that Individual Dahlits express anger at their position and treatment in society and their interactions with the narrator convey this. The term “manual scavenging” develops a strong and negative meaning within the film. It has a very negative, meaningful connotation as a result of the meaning and situation attached to the term.
-We internalize social expectations, a specific language, and social
values. We learn to share meanings and communicate symbolically through words and gestures. The entire documentary depends on the narrator’s, Dahlit’s interviewed and our own ability to share and understand symbolic communication. We are able to understand the narrator and infer meaning from certain gestures that subjects of the film make because we, as viewers, have internatilized a specific language.
-From this we learn what is proper or improper, whether we are “good” or
“bad”, who is important, and so forth. The young Dahlit children interviewed have already learned, presumably from their families, members of other castes and school environments, that they are lower caste. They also, however, seem to understand that the way they are treated is unfair and share their stories in hope for action and change. The picketing children have learned through their interaction with fellow protesters and families that their position in society and treatment is unfair and that they are no less important than upper caste children. Other members of society, particularly the upper caste and even some government officials clearly do not believe the same, denying mistreatment or the existence of caste conflict or manual scavenging, but in practice ignore or even encourage the strong, negative relationships between upper and lower caste members. The young children in the auditorium certainly have learned that they are “bad” or “unimportant” from teachers and peers. The small child who was locked in the bathroom at school for hours certainly took a strong negative message away from that interaction with his teacher.
