Category: Free Essays

Social Constructionism essentially represents a sociological theory of knowledge that studies the development of various sociological phenomena in social contexts. A social construct, the anchor of this theory, refers to a concept that is the artefact of a specific group. Social constructs, to elaborate, dispense with take away from commonly accepted inherent qualities of items, concepts, or issues, and instead focus on their dependence upon, and the contingent and conditional rationale of, our social sense. They describe such issues and things are more easily described as the result of numerous human choices, rather than of natural laws or divine intention.

The origins of present day social constructionist theories go back to the writings of Immanuel Kant. Kant argued for the existence of a world that was independent of human minds, thus implying that humans should not assert that they created the world. This world, he said, is without structure and is not divided into things and facts. Structure is imposed on the world by perceiving it and thinking of it in specific ways, as also and by the adoption of particular sets of beliefs, (rather than instead of others) about it. Vivine Burr (2003, p 2) argues that social constructionism enables individuals to adopt critical attitudes towards their conventional and traditional methods of perceiving and understanding the world and their own selves. It provides humans us with fresh ways on perceiving ideas and things that are considered to be commonplace and are unquestioningly accepted. Numerous things like for example money, newspapers or citizenship are socially constructed and. All of these things would not obviously have existed in the absence of society. Each of them furthermore could have well been constructed differently.

Social constructionism encourages people to question the widely held perception that conventional and accepted knowledge has sprung has come about from objective and impartial examination of the world. It is as such opposed to the positivist epistemology of traditional science and spurs thinking individuals to constantly question their assumptions about the appearance of their environment and its various components. This short study deals with the implications of social constructionism for social workers and how its use can help them social workers to understand human behaviour. Specific emphasis has been given to the use of social constructionism in understanding commonly held perceptions and attitudes towards mental disorders.

The Use of Social Constructionism by Social Workers to Understand Human Behaviour

Social workers have two fundamental objectives, namely the strengthening of the ability of individuals and groups to cope with and overcome the many difficulties and challenges they confront in life, and the bringing about of improvements in various social and environmental circumstances areas, in order to improve the satisfaction of human needs; especially of people from underprivileged and oppressed social segments.

Social workers plan and attempt their various interventions through their understanding of environmental circumstances, the various reasons for such these conditions, and the client system. Such understanding and knowledge and the consequent adoption of theoretic approaches significantly influence the point, the tool, and the nature of social work intervention. It becomes evident that adoption of theoretic preferences, based upon an understanding of the reality of the client environment, is crucial, both to social work theory and its practice.

Theories of classical empiricism assert that the truth about the world is established and is independent of the individual. Social constructionism conversely puts forth argues that such truth is certainly not independent of individuals but is actually depends upon their thoughts, perceptions and beliefs. Social workers, by using social constructionism, will be able to understand the various dimensions of reality within such individual thoughts, perceptions and beliefs. Constructionists state that reality cannot be known separately from our elucidation of it. Social constructionism works on the principle that reality is constructed socially and places emphasis on language as a critical route for interpretation of experience.

Whilst objectivists state that individuals make discoveries and find out about the reality of the world through the construction and testing of hypotheses via the actions of neutral observers, constructionists debunk such assumptions arguing that the interests and values of observers can never be separated from their observations and are thus bound to influence the final construction of common perceptions about world realities. Gergen (1985, p 270), states that generation of ideas of reality is initiated by social, rather than individual, processes and that the touted objective reality of the positivist approach is actually the result of various social construction processes that are influenced by historical, political, cultural and economic conditions. With such knowledge being essentially constructed, it can change over time and diverge across cultural groups that embrace different perceptions and beliefs about human nature and development. Considering that the norms, beliefs, values, traditions, attitudes and practices of different cultural groups vary from each other, the social construction of their knowledge is also likely to differ significantly. An understanding of this fundamental principle can help social workers in their realisation of the different perceptions, attitudes and behaviours of different individuals towards similar social phenomena or stimuli.

Social constructionism helps social workers in adopting critical stances towards established assumptions on regarding the social world that reinforce the interests of powerful and dominant social groups and assists them in realising that the world has come about because of historical processes of communication and negotiation between groups and individuals. Gergen (1985, p 266), states that people see the world through the eyes of their particular communities and cultures and respond accordingly. Established assumptions, understandings and behaviours of people are sustained by social, political, economic and moral institutions.

Payne (1997), states that reality, according to social constructionism, can be stated to be the guidance of behaviour by individual perceptions of knowledge and reality. Individuals arrive at shared perceptions of reality through the sharing of their knowledge via different social processes that first organise such knowledge and thereafter establish it by making it objective. Social and individual activity thus becomes habitual with individuals sharing their assumptions about their perceptions of reality. People behave in line with social conventions that are based on such shared knowledge. These conventions are furthermore institutionalised because of the agreement of many people on such understandings on different aspects of society. Such realisations and accords become legitimised by processes that integrate these ideas about reality into ordered and believable systems.

Social workers need to realise that social understanding is finally the combined result of various human understandings through the operation of circular processes, wherein individuals contribute to the construction of social meaning within social structures of societies through processes of institutionalisation and legitimisation. Societies consequently create conventions through the participation of individuals in their structures, which, in turn influences the behaviours of people. Spirals of constantly moving influences build and rebuild the conventions that people adopt and by which they live.

Berger and Luckmann, (1966), state that individuals experience the world to be an objective reality, comprising of persons and events that exist separately of individuals perceptions. Language provides the means through which individuals make sense of their environment, classify persons and events, and interpret new experiences. The shared reality of everyday life by different individuals distinguishes it from individual realities, (like dreams). Language helps individuals in sharing their experiences and making it available to others. Such sharing of reality leads to institutionalisation and thereafter to habitual ways of working. Habitualism makes the behaviour of different individuals predictable, facilitates joint activity and perpetuates social control mechanisms. Knowledge is as such institutionalised within sub-groups, or at social levels, and significantly influences the behaviour of people.

Social constructionism allows social workers to question dominant structures of knowledge and understand the impact of culture and history. Social workers by and large understand the requirements of humans through the interplay of different ideological, ethical, political and economic factors. An understanding of social constructionism can help them in understanding the responses behind the actions of both dominant and vulnerable groups of society and decide upon the adoption of the best suited routes for bringing about social change.

Social Constructionism and Mental Illness

Much of modern day society’s perceptions about mental ailments are influenced by the medical and psychological models, which state that medical illnesses are real; they concern disturbances in thoughts, experiences, and emotions and can be serious enough to cause functional impairment in individuals. Such ailments make it difficult for individuals to sustain interpersonal relationships and conduct their jobs. They can also sometimes result in self destructive actions, including suicides. The more serious of such illnesses, like extreme depression and schizophrenia, can often be chronic and lead to serious disability.

The social constructionist approach states that such much of modern day perceptions about mental ailments are caused by the specifically constructed vocabularies of medical and psychological models, replete with their elaborate terminologies for mental disorders and focused their focus on deficits. Social constructionism can help social workers in understanding the socially constructive and destructive illusions that have been created put up by existing medical and psychological models and deficit based language. Walker (2006), states that vocabularies of medical and psychological models, including the concept of mental illness itself, are essentially social constructions. They are made up of vocabularies that describe deficits and diseases and perceive human beings as things that can be examined, diagnosed and treated, much in the manner of machines. Such perceptions (a) lead to obsessions with compliance, (b) distinguish between normal and pathological states, and (c) position practitioners as experts, even as clients are represented built up determined as passive and obedient recipients of treatment. Recommended treatments focus on elimination of symptoms, support established paternalistic roles, and are not focused on actual client needs.

Examined from the perspective of linguistics, reified categories like bipolar disorder and schizophrenia appear to be defined by clusters termed as symptoms; schizophrenia for example is concerned with the occurrence of audio hallucinations. Such terms, it is evident exists only because of the creation of consensus among the dominant groups of doctors and psychologists and persist because of convention. Mental illnesses are often described akin to physical ailments like diabetes, where individuals are required to manage their lives with specific medications. Such comparisons are used to explain the working of medications and to make the diagnosis and recommended treatment for mental ailments acceptable to clients.

Such analogies however breakdown completely considering if it is realised that discussions about thoughts and feelings of individuals concern their identities and not their bodies. Social workers need to understand that the vocabularies of medical and psychological models essentially position clinicians as the most suitable interpreters of client experiences. Even apparently harmless terms like “clinical” or “treatment plans” establish contexts where clients are perceived to be abnormal or having pathologies, even as clinicians are established as authorities with abilities to perform interventions for assisting clients in overcoming their pathologies. With the power of definition lying with clinicians, the labelling of people as mentally ill pushes them to the borders of society and takes away from them their intrinsic rights and privileges.

Social constructionism helps social workers in understanding that whilst political and human pressure has helped in eliminating the incarceration of the mentally ill in mental hospitals, the distinction created by vocabulary on mental illness leads to the movement of centres of power to clinicians and undermines efforts for self determination and community integration. Such medical and psychological vocabularies constitute obstacles to more inclusive mental health programmes and undermine social understanding of people with mental disorders.

The institution of religion can be evaluated by varies sociological theories because the institution of religion has been part of every society since the beginning of humanity. With society it possible to find some sort of religion. Among these theories functionalism, conflict and interactions will be use to assess the impact each theory has on the religion institution. “Sociologist tends to be interested in the social impact of religion on individuals and the institution.” (Schaefer, 2009, p.323) They are not attempting to authenticate to the truth of the religion institutions merely probing how institution such as religions influences on individuals in society. Religion has been part of society foundation since the beginning of human existence. It has been the central part of other institution as well and have had a profound impact on the choices taken by other institutions. It is clear that Religion influence has extended widely through society.

When looking at religion, one might attempt to discover how religion contribute to the stability of a societies Emile Durkheim, “recognized the importance of religion in human societies.” (Schaefer, 2009, p.323)

He believed that religion brought about stability in society. Durkheim believed religion to be an influential force in society. Durkheim sought to answer a puzzling question, “How can human societies be held together when they are usually composed of individuals and social groups with diverse interests and aspirations.” (Schaefer, 2009, p. 327) Durkheim believe this was possible through what is called the “societal glue,” that is religion is source to keep society together and meaning and purpose in people in life. (p.327)

In a functionalist point of view, the institution religion gives humanity a moral compass and a place to belong and reinforces social norms. Places of worship have become more than worship site it is also a place to socialize or fellowship. Furthermore, religion give different groups a certain sense of connection to others they might be of different faith they still find themselves bound to others who have a similar belief system. Institutions such as education and families are essential in relaying morals as the social norm, but religion may well be the institution that holds all of those to a higher standard.

Religion provides support during some of life struggle and changes by applying morals in the early in a child life. Changes can be overwhelming, however with a strong religious tradition one can find meaning and direction in all of life’s tough times.

Conflict Theory

In the process of talking about religion, the focus is mainly on the positive aspects however, one can also find negative aspects in religion institution as well. Religions from the beginning of society have been the reason behind many conflicts in the world. Even today, in society conflict occur due to religion. For example in the United States, religion is used as a weapon by social conservatives. They use religion to push their social agenda such as the issue of abortion, same sex marriage, and stem cell research. Likewise, liberals tend to blame religion for a lack of freedom in make the afore mention choices. Religion has also been the source of conflicts between different types of faith such as Christian and Muslims. While in other countries, the dysfunction of religion has made citizens turn on their fellow citizens. For example, in Iraqi the Sunnis and the Shiites have fought civil wars because of different type of the same religion. In Europe, the Protestants and catholic have battled for years over different ideology.

“The conflict theorist believes that religion is a potential obstacle to a structural social change but also can be a source for cultural change through liberation theology” (Schaefer, 2009, p.330) Dysfunction of religion is common ground for the functionalist and conflict theorists. The dysfunction of religion proves many theories within the conflict theory itself. Conflict theorist would say that religion provides tension between different groups, and societies. However, Functionalist and Conflict theorists see religion as possible source of social structure.

The conflict perspective can be defined “as a sociological approach that assumes that social behavior is best understood on terms of tension between groups over power, or the allocation of resources, including housing, money, access to services, and political representation” (Schaefer, 2009, p. 14-15). Furthermore, “Conflict theorists examine the relationship of religion to social inequalities, especially how religion reinforces a society’s stratification system.” (Schaefer, 2009, p. 329)

Karl Marx stated, “Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world it is the opium of the people.” He believed religion is a source of controlling working class, to convince them to accept their place in life. He states that Religion institutions are not exactly a positive force. Marx said that “religion gives people the illusory hope that things will get better in the next life and prevents them from seeking a political answer in this”( Marx, K. & Engels, F. 1843)It is also believed, “Religion legitimizes, reinforces and perpetuates the rule of the ruling class and their interests.” (Marx, K. & Engels, F., 1843) Conflict theorists consider religion an instrument to hold the working class in a state disregard to their social standing.

The conflict theories hold that religion gives the society a false sense of hope, and cause them to be satisfied with their current state. Religion is often used as an instrument for the upper class, to subdue the lower class. Some religious organization such the catholic churches would have the layperson believe it better to be poor because it easier to enter heaven. The bible portrays the difficulty of a wealthy person giving up their wealth to follow Jesus Christ. This tends to make the lower class think it okay to be poor because they will have less to lose for the sake of the kingdom of God.

Religion therefore hindered change in society by promoting obedience to domination; by take people’s attention away the injustices in society. Furthermore, it is use to justify imbalance of power available to only a select group by stressing rewards to come. Although people commonly assume that Karl Marx did not think religion had a place in society, that assumption is not entirely accurate. He believed that religion acted as a place of refuge from the difficulties of life and oppression. However, Marx thought that traditional religion would eventually fade.

The final sociological perspective of religion institution to be analyzed is the Interactionist perspective; this theory “a generalize posture about every day forms of social interaction, in order to explain society as a whole.”(Schaefer, 2009, p.16) The Interactionist perspective studies are in contrast to conflict and functionalist perspective society because they evaluate social behavior on a micro sociological level. Interactionists’ theory focusing on the micro-sociology of a society in order to understand macro-sociology.

Therefore Interactionist tend to examine the simply aspects of society, for instance, they study the interaction of people within specific institutions such as religion. These interaction can be observed in ones belief systems, and how such systems help society understand the things we experience in our everyday lives. “Interactionism was first developed in the United States.

George Herbert Mead is widely regarded as the founder the interactionist perspective often credited with founding the Interactionist perspective.” Mead taught at the University of Chicago, and he pay attention to individualizes setting and small intimate groups. Mead’s teaching has led other moved away from macro social behavior to the micro level. He would concentrate on body language such as a facial expression, and how it effected other in the group mood. (Schaefer, 2009, p.17).

Interactionists say that “social change occurs when the positions and communication with one another change. The main idea of an Interactionist sociologist is to study nonverbal communication and small groups paying particular attentions to objects and symbols .”(Schaefer, 2009, p.16)

Within this theory, it has been stated “religion is seen as a reference group, for many people, religion serves as a reference group to help them define themselves.

This is where the functionalist and Interactionist theory find common ground; both perspectives see religion as a positive force, which provide a stabilizing factor within a society. Both also agree that religion can enrich an individual’s life and enhances an individuals’ ability to deal with some of the difficulties in life. Regardless it is clear through the research of both perspectives that religion brings people within society, together; therefore adding a harmonizing and supportive structure with the society and or culture.

An example of this is the civil rights movement of the 1960’s. “The U.S. civil rights movement is perhaps the best example of a social movement drawing on religious resources to accomplish its goals. Both religious leaders and laity were active in the civil rights movement.

Congregations provided material resources necessary for large-scale political action, acted as conduits for frame dissemination and provided an ideal setting for the micro mobilization process to occur.” (Loveland, M. T., Walls, E. N., Myers, D. J. and Sikkink, D., 2003).

Another example of religion’s affect on social movements can be found in the debate over abortion. The issue of abortion has strong ties to the institution of religion within the United States. Almost every religious faction found in the U.S. has strong beliefs on whether abortion is immoral or not.

“Another notable sociologist Max Weber saw religion as a primary source of social change. He analyzed how Protestantism gave rise to the Protestant ethic, which stimulated what he called the spirit of capitalism. The result was capitalism, which transformed society.” (Henslin J. ch. 13)

In closing, one can clearly see the differences in the three sociological perspectives in regards to religion. While the three sociological perspectives have differing views on the institution of religion, they also see religion as a force within society that can motivate and facilitate social change and movement within a society. The institution of religion has a profound affect on the society, in which it dwells, adding both positive and possibly negative attributes that add to the stability of that society. However, a society that uses religion as a cornerstone, will ultimately find that it provides a settling sense over that society. In addition, religion will assist in the establishment and maintenance of the social norms and expectation within that culture.

This assignment will explore C. Wright Mills concept of a ‘sociological imagination’ when looking at the problems of the individual, and explain how this theory might assist social workers. It will then look at a contemporary social problem encountered by social workers, in this case poverty. It will explore and discuss by reference how three sociological theories (Marxism, Feminism and Functionalists) offer useful insights into the socially constructed nature of poverty.

C. Wright Mills (1916 – 62) had a vision of reforming society and popularising sociology with his theory of the sociological imagination, Slattery (1991). Leon-Guerrero (2005:2) explains “The sociological imagination links our personal lives and experiences with the social world”. It is the ability to look further than the individual’s personal issue, recognising and linking macro scale environmental factors (economic, political and other societal institutions). Mills (1959:12) argued that this theory “aˆ¦ is the idea that the individual can understand his own experience and gauge his own fate by locating himself within his period, that he can know his own chances in life by becoming aware of those of all individuals in his circumstances”. Mills is supported by Cunningham and Cunningham (2008) who argue, instead of focusing on the individuals’ inability to cope as the main problem; step back and look at the bigger picture. Cunningham and Cunningham (2008) support this by using an example of someone experiencing depression post redundancy. They argue that instead focusing on the individual’s failure to cope; the problem could exist due to social structures within the macro environment, such as, current economic or political conditions. Cree (2000) adds that the failure by social workers to make such links will result in oppressive practice. Additionally, Cunningham and Cunningham (2008:7) argue “learning to think sociologically is one of the most important skills a social worker can bring to their practice” as it “enables social workers to step back from taken for granted assumptions about social life and to critically unpack these assumptions” (2008:7). This is further supported by Leon-Guerrero (2005:14) “By continuing to develop a sociological imagination and recognising the larger social, cultural and structural forces, we can identify appropriate measures to address these social problems.”

In summary, the sociological imagination is able to assist social workers by allowing them to reject common sense explanations for the consequences of social actions. It enables practitioners to develop skills which help them to work in an anti-oppressive manner. Fundamentally, it helps distinguish between individuals’ private problems and wider social problems; one cannot be properly understood without the other.

The contemporary social problem to be discussed is poverty, as this an ongoing social issue that is common amongst service users. Consequently, a large amount of social work practice takes place around poverty. This is supported by Smale et al (2000:18) “Those who use, and are required to use, social work services continue overwhelmingly to be poor and disadvantaged.” Social workers have been criticised for their lack of knowledge surrounding poverty. Cunningham and Cunningham (2008:32) who argue “The relationship between poverty and social work is not new, yet it is one that remains understated and implicit in social work training courses and practice.” Becker (1997:114) claims “Social workers have little understanding of the complex processes that generate and maintain poverty; they have limited insight into how their political and welfare ideologies and attitudes to poverty affect their daily practice with poor people; they have failed to place poverty on the agenda for social work theorising, education, policy and practice.” Krumer-Nevo et al (2009:225) (16/12/09) takes this further, arguing “despite the profound commitment of social work towards people living in poverty, the social work profession has failed to develop practice based on awareness of poverty.”

Sociologists have favoured two definitions of poverty; these are Absolute and Relative poverty. Giddens (2006) suggests the concept of absolute poverty “is grounded in the idea of subsistence – the basic conditions that must be met in order to sustain a physically healthy existence. People who lack these fundamental requirements for human existence – such as sufficient food, shelter and clothing are said to live in poverty.” Relative poverty emphasises the disparities within society. Leon-Guerrero (2005:224) refers to this as a situation whereby “some people fail to achieve the average income and lifestyle enjoyed by the rest of society.”

Leon-Guerrero (2006) suggests that the construction of social problems arise from social conditions that lead to negative consequences for both the individual and the social world. Moulder (2000:2) claims “sociologists came to define social problems as problems that concern large numbers of people, have social-structural causes, and require social-structural solutions.” Poverty has many negative factors that affect individuals and society, this is supported by a report conducted on behalf of the Department of Work and Pensions called ‘Living with Poverty’ (2009:10) (2310/09), which claims “the impact that poverty can have on people’s lives shows that the experience of poverty is almost always overwhelmingly negative, and can have psychological, physical, relational and practical effects on people’s lives.” These findings are supported by Beresford et al (1999).

For a social problem to become defined as an actual problem it must have both objective and subjective realities. The objective reality comes by acknowledging that a social condition does exist. Leon Guerrero (2006) states “A social condition does not have to be personally experienced by every individual in order to be considered a social problem. The objective reality of a social problem comes from acknowledging that a social condition does exist.” Poverty can be seen through media, charities campaigning to help the less privileged in Britain and even on the streets in the forms of homelessness and big issue sellers. A report by Hirsch (2008) (3/12/09) estimated that child poverty costs around ?25 billion a year in losses, stating “Child poverty imposes huge costs on those affected but it is also costly to us all”. This suggests everyone is affected by poverty, as taxes are used to eliminate poverty. According to the report Poverty and Wealth across Britain 1968 to 2005 (1997:14) “Over the past 15 years, more households have become poor, but fewer are very poor.” Although the number of extremely poor has decreased there was still a systematic rise in poverty defined as ‘breadline poverty’. A report by Kempson (1996:1) (3/12/09) further identified that “One in four of the British population live in homes with less than half the average disposable income.” This report also identified issues that showed people living in poverty were suffering from a variety of shortcomings including poor health, underprivileged housing, and unemployment.

A subjective reality “addresses how a problem becomes defined as a problem”, Leon-Guerrero (2005:6). This is through powerful groups who look at tackling such problems, such as, government and media. This process is what is known as social construction. Giddens (2006:154) “Rather then assuming that social reality objectively exists, social constructivists work to document and analyse the processes through which social reality is constructed, such that the construction then serves to confirm its own status as social reality”.

Poverty has been termed a social problem in society by the UK government. The Department of Work and Pensions (2009) have clearly stated “The Government’s target is to halve child poverty by 2010 and be on the way to eradicating it by 2020.” This message is supported and reinforced through various forms of media and charities who work towards this goal. Leon-Guerrero (2005:6) in discussing social problems states “they become real only when they are subjectively defined or perceived as problematic.”

This assignment will now explore functionalism, Marxism and feminist theories in relation to poverty.

Functionalism was developed by Emile Durkheim (1858-1917).Leon-Guerrero (2005:10) asserts “Functionalists use a macro perspective focusing on how society creates and maintains social order”. According to Durkheim, society can be viewed as an organic object; every aspect of society is co-dependant and contributes to society as a whole. Cunningham and Cunningham (2008:12) uses a biological analogy to explain functionalism “Just as biologists understand the ways in which different bodily organs such as the heart, the brain, the kidneys, the lungs and so on, perform a specific function to keep the human body alive, so with society, it’s different components work in harmony with one common end aˆ¦” . The body is termed as whole organism with each function depending on the other to ensure healthy ‘functioning’. In social terms these organs can be used to describe social institutions and the relationship they have with different institutions. Slattery (1991:63) also uses a similar analogy to describe this theory: “It functions like any other natural organism as a system of independent parts – the economy, the family, the government and so on – held together by not a central nervous system but a central value system, a set of sociological guidelines called norms based on underlying moral consensus, or collective consciousness.”

Giddens (2006:21) states “Functionalism emphasises the importance of moral consensus, in maintaining order and stability in society.” This is achieved through shared values and beliefs, learned through socialisation. Social control is desirable and change tends to be seen as disruptive. Social problems are seen a result of deviance; this is due to lack of conformity, failing to conform to the norms of society. Acknowledging that poverty does exist within the social structure, functionalists believe that poverty is a beneficial function to society. Leon-Guerrero (2005:228) argues that “Functionalists observe that poverty is a product of our social structure” he further adds that poverty is seen as a “natural consequence of system stratification.” This refers to technological advances which have left behind a workforce of unskilled workers. This theory implies that inequality is both natural and essential, as it provides an incentive for people to work harder and better themselves. This is supported by Davis and Moore (1945) who argue, “social inequality is thus an unconsciously evolved device by which by which societies ensure that the most important positions are conscientiously filled by the most qualified persons” cited in Best (2005:9). Poverty is regarded on a macro scale in terms of the benefits it provides for society as a whole, rather than for the individuals in poverty. It would provide jobs for those who are tasked to alleviate such problems such as social workers. Theresa Funicello (1993) cited in Leon Guerrero (2005:230) observes “The poverty industry once again substituted its own interests for that of poor people”. Parsons (1953) backs this up, arguing “aˆ¦ that lack of equality of opportunity would clearly have an impact on an individual’s opportunity to make a contribution to the organisation or the wider social system” cited in Best (2005:27). H. J. Gans (1971), argued “that poverty exists because it is functional for society”, cited in Leon Gurrerro (2005:228). Gans (1971:2-4) (18/10/09) claimed “the existence of poverty ensures that society’s “dirty work” will be done,” and “poverty creates jobs for a number of occupations and professions that serve or “service” the poor, or protect the rest of society from them.” Furthermore “the poor can be identified and punished as alleged or real deviants in order to uphold the legitimacy of conventional norms.” Gans believes poverty will “be eliminated only when it becomes dysfunctional for the affluent or powerful, or when the powerless can obtain enough power to change society.”

In summary, Functionalists seem to justify the social status quo and the effects of poverty on individuals/society. The poor are seen as less able and deviant as they do not conform to society’s norms. Taking into consideration the current economical state, the recession has lead to unemployment, forcing more people into poverty; functionalists would agree that institutes were not working together, and that this was just a temporary problem. The role of a functionalist social worker would be to support deviant service users back into society’s norms.

“The ideas of Karl Marx (1818-93) contrast sharply with those of Comte and Durkheim, but like them he sought to explain the changes that were taking place in society during the time of Industrial Revolution,” Giddens (2006:14). Marxism is a conflict theory, and like the functionalists they too view society on a macro scale. However, Marxists argue that society operates in a permanent state of conflict at all levels as a consequence of the clash of interests between two classes (bourgeoisie and proletariat). Leon-Guerrero (2005) suggests that conflict theorists believe poverty exists due to class division in society; it helps those in power to maintain and expand their position leaving little to share with others. Marxists would argue that poverty is caused by capitalism, which concentrates wealth in the hands of the ruling class. According to Best (2005) the bourgeoisie were the owners of capital (rich) who employed the proletariat, who had only their labour to sell (poor). Marists believed that the bourgeoisie exploited and made profit from the proletariat by not paying them full value of their work. By accepting a low wage is creating a conflict of interest, as one social group is benefiting on the back of another social group. Giddens (2006:16) argues that the conflict occurs due to inequalities between the classes, “The relationship between classes is an exploitive one, since workers have little or no control over their labour and employers are able to generate profit by appropriating the product of workers’ labour.”

In an article ‘Poverty in the Big Issue’, Searing (2007) claims poverty is structurally constructed as a result a modern capitalist society. “Poverty and inequality seem to be an intrinsic part of modern capitalism.” She argues “This Labour government, by continuing the neoliberal, modernising agenda of the previous government, regards poverty and inequality as the inevitable price to be paid to maintain competitiveness in the global economy.” Searing (2007) also believes that social class plays a big part in society, arguing “Social work may endorse anti-oppressive ideas but class inequalities, which give rise to and perpetuate income inequalities, remain as wide as ever. Clearly, anti-oppressive practice is at its weakest when it comes to the issue of class.” Furthermore, she asserts that “The social class a child is born into is a major determinant of their life chances.” Searing (2007) argues that the UK government “chooses to minimise the part played by social and economic factors, outside the control of the individual, in causing poverty and implies that in most cases personal inadequacy is at the root of people’s failure to remain independent and self-supporting.”

In summary, Marxists believe that the source of poverty lies within societal structures and the existence of poverty are beneficial to the ruling class. As long as there is poverty, capitalism will exist. Cunningham and Cunningham (2008:22) state as a Marxist social worker you would “help people to adjust to their difficulties, by providing services, or a listening ear; and in doing so, structural problems become individualised with attention shifted away from the real cause.” This is backed by Payne (2005: 231) who suggests that social workers “are seen agents of class control enhancing the oppression by capitalist societies of the working class. They simply enable the capitalist system to reproduce itself in the next generation by helping people to cope with the difficulties of the system.”

There are different views of feminism. Dealamont (2003:17) identifies “three feminist perspectives, liberal, Marxist and radical”, all of which were “developed in the early 1970s.” Chafetz (1988) cited in Dealamont (2003:18) argued that all feminist theories were defined so that “gender is a central focus” where “gender is systematically related to social contradictions, inequalities and pressure points”, additionally “it can be used to ‘challenge, counteract or change’ situations in which women are devalued or disadvantaged.” This is supported by Trevithick (2005).

Feminists would argue that “women are more likely to experience poverty than men” due to their disadvantageous position in society, Taylor (2002:179). Neubeck and Cazenave (2001) agree, arguing that the government is moving towards maintaining a patriarchal society where the male continues to dominate the welfare policy. Moore (1998:27) asserts “Majority of people in poverty are women” and the “economic and welfare systems conspire to keep them there.” They argue that the government “Need to recognise this and alter the system to give woman the chance to escape from poverty.” Furthermore, feminists argue that women earn less and have less sexual power in society. Glendinning and Miller (1995) agree with these arguments stating women are more likely to live in poverty because they are seen as “secondary workers” whose main role is “seen as domestic.” Additionally, “More women than men rely on benefits as their main source of income; lone parents are vulnerable to poverty, and a large majority are women. The majority of pensioners are also women” cited in Haralambos and Holborn (1995:145).

During the early 1970’s the media and government created an image of women where they were portrayed to be abusing the welfare system, aimed at mainly single mothers these women were believed to be having more children to avoid having to work and gain more financial benefits (Leon-Gurrero 2005). Feminists theories of poverty tend to highlight that women are overly represented in figures of poverty. This is because of their weaker position in society, their weaker economical position. Moore (1998:70) argues that the proportion of children and population living in poverty are likely to be women, as they “form the majority of the elderly, the disable, single parents and the low paid”. If you look at benefits figures it shows the vast majority of people claiming benefits in this country would be women, because they head single parent families and women tend to earn less. This is supported by Moore (1998:70) who states, “As single parents, women are unable to work.” So statistically in old days, women were more likely to encounter poverty. Moore (1998:71) states “Since the 1970’s there has been a rapid increase in the number of lone-parent families in the UK.” Additionally, “Today, more then one in every six families is headed by a lone mother. This is caused mainly by the growth in the divorce rate and by the increase in lone parenthood (that is women having and raising children on their own).” These arguments are supported by an article by the BBC News website (2008) ‘Women’s low pay behind poverty’, which argues “40% of households are now headed by single mothers, and this has concerning implications for tackling child poverty.” Moreover, “The TUC said that mothers were being trapped in part-time, low-paid jobs. More than 75% of part-time workers were female. The gender pay gap for full-time workers was 17.2%.” It further adds that “Women in Britain were more likely to be poor than others in Europe from the moment they conceived.” Haralambos and Holborn (1995:145) support this, arguing “household incomes are not distributed equally. Women tend to have smaller independent incomes than men and there is no guarantee that they will share fully the income of their husbands or partners.” Moore (1998:70) argues that the proportion of children and population living in poverty are likely to be women, as they “form the majority of the elderly, the disable, single parents and the low paid”.

Radical Feminists argue that women form the majority of the poor because they are “restricted by family” as “It is generally regarded as the woman’s role to take primary responsibility for the care of their family” Moore (1998:95). They see the nuclear family as a major contributor towards women’s oppression. Both Giddens (2006) and Haralambos and Holborn (1995:592) support this argument stating “the family is often seen by radical feminists as the key institution producing women’s oppression in modern societies.” Radical feminists also argue “political and economic power is in the hands of men. As a result of this, decisions about economic matters, as well as about issues of health and welfare, reflect the interests of men, and may well harm women. This situation of male power is known as patriarchy,” Moore (1998:23). This is supported by Leon-Guerrero (2005:230) who claims “Feminist scholars argue the welfare state is an arena of political struggle. The drive to maintain male dominance and the patriarchal family is assumed to be the principal force of shaping the formation, implementation, and outcomes of the U.S. welfare policy.” Radical Feminists believes that poverty is caused by gender, men forever superior and women relentlessly submissive. Regrettably with the perpetual fragmentation and modification society is experiencing this theory is old-fashioned. Relationships are not always, heterosexual and same sex relationships have been thriving.

However, Liberal feminists would agree with radical feminists that the role of the nuclear family is repressive towards woman, but they argue that patriarchy is not the cause of women’s oppression. This is supported by Giddens (2006:468) who claims liberal feminists “look for explanations of gender inequalities in social and cultural attitudes.” Additionally Cunningham (2008:97) also states that liberal feminists believe that “the roots of women’s oppression lie with the irrational prejudice, stereotyping and outdated attitudes and practices that lead to sex discrimination occurring in all spheres of life.” Furthermore, Giddens (2006:470) suggests liberal feminists “tend to focus their energies on establishing and protecting equal opportunities for women through legislation and other democratic means.” Liberal feminists work to bring about change through legislation, such as, equal pay act as opposed to radical feminists who try to defeat the system. Finally, Cunningham (2008:99) states that liberal feminists argue “Women lose out on the ability to develop their talents; business loses out because it fails to harness the potential and ability of 50% of the population, and men lose out because they are denied the opportunity to develop close ties with their children.”

This assignment has explored Mills theory of a sociological imagination and how it may assist social workers when considering the problem of an individual. Furthermore, it has looked at how three different sociological theories can offer useful insights into the socially constructed nature of poverty. It will now focus on the impact of these theories upon social work practice.

Sociologists have made a significant contribution towards the understanding of poverty, through their theories. Mills (1959:8) stated “Social work is fundamentally about values and about value-judgements. Sociological knowledge can provide us with a framework for anti-discriminatory, anti-oppressive practice, by giving us the analytical tools with which to begin to explore the relationship between individuals and society” Mills theory of sociological imagination is one which does not have a bias and can be applied readily to any case. This theory enables social workers to see the bigger picture and protect service users against anti-oppressive and anti-discriminatory practice. Cree (200:5) argues that this is the reason “social workers need a sociological imagination.” Moreover, Cree (200:209) argues that sociological theories do not provide all the answers to social problems but, “the questions themselves lead to the potential development of sensitive, anti-oppressive practice.”

Sociology theories inform social workers of differing views on the existence and continuation of poverty. The contribution of liberal feminists has raised positive awareness that changes in the social structure can bring about positive chance in the social structure. Giddens (2006:26) states “What sociology gives is as an awareness of cultural differences that allow us to see the social world from many perspectives.” Giddens (2006:27) asserts that “There is often a connection between studying sociology and the prompting of a social conscience.” This is supported by Cree (2000:7) who argues “sociology offers social work the opportunity to explore meanings beneath taken-for-granted assumptions about behaviour, action and social structure. It offers a knowledge and value base which is not rooted in individual pathology but instead seeks to understand individuals in the context of the broader structures that make up their lives (including social class, gender, age, race, and ethnicity) and the historical movement within which they are living.” Additionally, Domenelli (2002:4) asserts “Social workers have a responsibility to challenge this grotesque image of poor people and, besides bringing to public notice the strengths of those who battle to transcend social exclusion, to work to empower those who are engulfed by the weight of circumstances in which they are embedded.” Moreover, “Promoting social justice and human development in an unequal world provides the raison d’etre of social work practice, and is a key way of discharging society’s contract in assisting vulnerable people in its midst. ” In order for practitioners to practice anti-oppressively, Cunningham and Cunningham (2008:48) suggest a “task-centred” approach. This “offers a very practical model which is potentially very empowering.” Dominelli (2002) agrees with this approach, arguing that social workers and service users should work together to achieve positive change. Additionally, Cunningham and Cunningham (2008:48) argue “Practice is based on the premise that the service user will work in partnership with the social worker and learn new methods that will equip them in the future. In this sense, workers could adopt a very practical way to address some aspects of poverty.” They further suggest that “this still doesn’t go far enough, as this method of practice is based upon an individual approach and doesn’t address the bigger picture. Possibly combining task-centred working with other more radical methods of working might address this.” Thompson (2006:26) asserts “In order to understand how inequalities and discrimination feature in the social circumstances of clients, and in the interactions between clients and the welfare state, it is helpful to analyse the situation in terms of three levels. These three levels (P,C and S) are closely interlinked.” This is further supported by Cree (2000:208) who confirms that “inequality and oppression exist at both individual and structural levels.” Therefore it’s important for social workers to understand this model as it provides grounds for challenging inequalities. Trevithick (2005:284) supports this, arguing this approach “emphasises the importance of social, economic and political solutions to ‘social problems’, thereby shifting the onus of blame from the individual without denying responsibility.”

In summary, by developing and using our sociological imagination and being aware of theoretical perspectives and approaches to practice, ensures the necessary steps to guard against anti-oppressive and anti-discriminatory practice.

WORD COUNT: 2200

Knowledge, understanding and science have ever since the Age of Enlightenment been extremely important to mankind. A crave for interpretation of the world around us describes a lot of the general human curiosity. But what about ourselves? Is it important, or even possible, to get a valid view of our own behaviour? Are we able to describe ourselves and our own culture – in the widened sense of the term?

In this essay, I will try to take a closer look at what sociological imagination means and why it is significant. I will start off by giving a brief definition of key terms, which I will try to explore and assess further in the main body. Then I will explain the main aims of sociology and expose possible sociological issues.

The sources I have used in this task are mainly books on the reading list, which are classic sociological works. I have also taken advantage of Anthony Giddens’ book “Sociology”. Besides the fact that he is one of the most famous British sociologists, I find his book easy to read and in general an excellent introduction to the science. To get short and concise definitions, I have also used Cambridge online dictionary, which I consider as “safe”.

Main body

What does it mean to think sociologically?

Sociology is, as the well-known social scientist Anthony Giddens defines; “the study of human social life, groups and societies” (Giddens 2001:2).

The discipline of sociology concerns issues such as types of societies, the concept of culture, cultural differences, socialisation and globalisation – for a start. One could keep on mentioning aspects, but a sociologist is, roughly said, basically interested in everything human beings do – consciously or sub-consciously (Giddens, 2001).

Giddens claims that it is a “dazzling” project, because it is so “close”; it is about our own social behaviour. And that expression may be spot on – as it is old news that seeing oneself from others perspective can be rather difficult.

The Cambridge online dictionary defines imagination as: “the ability to form pictures in the mind (…) and the ability to think of new ideas” (http://dictionary.cambridge.org).

The sociological imagination is about trying to define, interpret and examine the human life at different stages, different cultures, in different parts of the world – by looking at its individuals at daily life basis. We can then, hopefully, understand the larger historical context of human social life (Mills,1959).

Research is a big part of sociological work, and sociologists use different methods to explore different matters. Relevant approaches may be comparative (one social context to another), developmental (present vs. the past), empirical (by asking how), theoretical (knowledge of theory) and factual (basic, proved issues) types of question (Giddens, 2001).

According to Mills, one of the most central points of the imagination is the ability to shift from one perspective to another, to see the complexity in all findings: from a microsociological view to an outlook of overall world history (Mills, 1959). Relating to that, Mills emphasize the link between what he calls “personal troubles” and “public issues”, and argues that this is a fundamental tool of all sociologists. Imagine a man loses his job. Even though he may feel it’s the end of the world, it is genuinely a non-existing problem for people in general. But what about when three million people in a country lose their job? That will without doubt cause a lot of problems in this society (Mills, 1959). A decreasing personal economy equals no shopping, no shopping means a falling market, a falling market leads to higher unemployment. VoilA – a vicious circle.

So what is the aim of sociologists? “While the sociologist cannot solve any of these practical problems – at least not by himself – he may (…) have an important contribution to make their comprehension and solution” (Wirth 1938:24). In other words: A sociologist can put focus on these elements and try to expose crucial links in our societies.

What kinds of troubles may a sociologist encounter?

Many sociologists have done different kinds of social analysis during the past centuries, and the receptions have been varying. Not surprisingly, a highly relevant element in all sociological work is the element of evidence. The common denominator of all science work is validity, as it also creates the main difference from fiction. But what is “the truth”? How can we be sure a social analysis is trustworthy? Who has the right to define what is correct observation and what is a false one?

One well-known analysis is Michael Young and Peter Willmott’s book “Family and kinship in East London”, which concerns the urban working class and the government’s housing policy in the post-war years. As the authors say themselves; “we can only report what people say, which is not necessarily the same as what they actually do” (Young & Willmott 1957: 20).

No doubt – sociology is a complex and sensitive area, as it touches our own way of living, ideas, values and choices. That is also maybe one of the reasons why so many people find it exceptionally interesting.

“Serious differences among social scientists occur not between those who would observe without thinking and those who would think without observing; the differences have rather to do with what kinds of thinking, what kinds of observing, and what kinds of links, if any, there are between them” (Mills 1959:42)

Conclusion

(In this essay I have exposed the meaning – and discussed the aims – of the sociological imagination. I have also exposed possible encountering troubles regarding the science of sociology.) Not necessarily?

The sociological imagination is about reflecting upon our own social behaviour and cultural habits. It is basically to put a question mark about all the things we do in our everyday life often without even noticing.

According to Charles Wright Mills, the ability to shift between different points of view is one of the significant proficiency about social scientist. In other words, it is valuable to see the link between personal problems and big issues of the society.

Sociology can be useful in due to make us aware of cultural differences, analyse and evaluate our political society and last but not least, increase the overall self-understanding.

Reference list
Literature
Giddens, Anthony, 2001. Sociology.4th edition. Cambridge/Oxford: Polity Press/ Blackwell Publishers.
Mills, Charles Wright, 1970. The sociological imagination. 2nd edition. Great Britain: Pelican Books
Young, Michael & Willmott, Peter 1990. Family and kinship in East London.4th edition. London: Penguin Books.
Wirth, L., 1938.Urbanism as a way of life. The American Journal of Sociology, Vol.44 (No.1), p.1-24.

Most influential socialist thinker of his time.

The philosopher, social scientist, historian and revolutionary, Karl Marx, is without a doubt the most influential socialist thinker to emerge in the 19th century. Although he was largely ignored by scholars in his own lifetime, his social, economic and political ideas gained rapid acceptance in the socialist movement after his death in 1883. Until quite recently almost half the population of the world lived under regimes that claim to be Marxist. This very success, however, has meant that the original ideas of Marx have often been modified and his meanings adapted to a great variety of political circumstances. In addition, the fact that Marx delayed publication of many of his writings meant that is been only recently that scholars had the opportunity to appreciate Marx’s intellectual stature.

Karl Marx, the son of Hirschel and Henrietta Marx, was born in Trier, Germany, in 1818. Hirschel Marx was a lawyer and to escape anti-Semitism decided to abandon his Jewish faith when Karl was a child. Although the majority of people living in Trier were Catholics, Marx decided to become a Protestant. He also changed his name from Hirschel to Heinrich. His parents were Jewish, but converted to Lutheranism when he was only six.

It is difficult to know what effect this would have on his later philosophy, but we do know that Marx would be antithetical to religious belief, at one time pronouncing it, “the opiate of the masses

After schooling in Trier (1830-35), Marx entered Bonn University to study law. At university he spent much of his time socialising and running up large debts. His father was horrified when he discovered that Karl had been wounded in a duel. Heinrich Marx agreed to pay off his son’s debts but insisted that he moved to the more sedate Berlin University.

Educated in the best universities in Germany at Bonn, Berlin and Jena, he was greatly influenced by the most prominent scholar of the previous generation, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel. As youth turned to middle age, Karl Marx’s views became more radical and finally hardened into the body of thought we know today. His journey to this point took him out of Germany where the newspaper he edited, the Rheinische Zeitung, was suppressed by the Government. He moved to Paris in 1843 and later to Brussels in 1845.

Marx himself considered his theory of surplus-value his most important contribution to the progress of economic analysis (Marx, letter to Engels of 24 August 1867). It is through this theory that the wide scope of his sociological and historical thought enables him simultaneously to place the capitalist mode of production in his historical context, and to find the root of its inner economic contradictions and its laws of motion in the specific relations of production on which it is based

Marx was partial to Hegel and his theories and was influenced by Hegel’s views that history was a dialectical process. He did not adhere to Hegel’s spirituality . He was also influenced by Fuerbach, Saint-Simon, Proudhon and Bakunin. While living in Paris, he began to associate with the working clasas for the first time. He began to formulate his thought that revolution was the key to achieving balance between the ‘upper class’ and the working class. He wrote and spoke on social change through revolution. He believed that there was great energy between proleterians and capitalists. Marx began to appeal to more of the common people during the early depression days. American educatin became aware of soviet education reforms during the 1920’s and through George S. Counts who visited Russia and brought their educational system of reform to light in America. But only a mere 10 years later, American educators did not think societ education was good.

The theory associated with Marxism was developed in mid-19th century Europe

by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. Although Marx and Engels did not write widely

about education, they developed theoretical perspectives on modern societies that have

been used to highlight the social functions of education and their concepts and methods

have served to both theorize and criticize education in the reproduction of capitalist

societies, and to support projects of alternative education. In this study, I will first briefly

sketch the classical perspectives of Marx and Engels, highlighting the place of education

in their work. Then, I lay out the way that Marxian perspectives on education were

developed in the Frankfurt School critical theory, British cultural studies, and other neo-

Marxian and post-Marxian approaches grouped under the label of critical pedagogy, that

emerged from the work of Paulo Freire and is now global in scope. I argue that Marxism

provides influential and robust perspectives on education, still of use, but that classical

Marxism has certain omissions and limitations that contemporary theories of society and

education need to overcome.

The young Marx and Engels thus perceived that without education the working

class was condemned to lives of drudgery and death, but that with education they had a

chance to create a better life. In their famous 1848 “Communist Manifesto,” Marx and

Engels argued that growing economic crises would throw ever more segments of the

middle classes, and the older peasant and artisan classes, into the impoverished situation

of the proletariat and would thus produce a unified working class, at least one with

interests in common. They declared that the bourgeois class is constantly battling against

the older feudal powers, among its own segments, and against the foreign bourgeoisie,

and thus enlists the proletariat as its ally. Consequently, the proletariat gains education

and experience which it can use to fight the ruling class.

The Marxist approach to education is broad constuctivist and emphasises activity, collaboration and critique, rather than passive absorption of knowledge, emulation of elders and conformism; it is student-centred rather than teacher centred, but recognises that education cannot transcend the problems and capabilities of the society in which it is located.

The Soviet, Chinese, and other Communist states were at most only partly structured along Marxist “classless” lines, and while such Communist leaders as Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, Joseph Stalin, and Mao Zedong staunchly claimed Marxist orthodoxy for their pronouncements, they in fact greatly stretched the doctrine in attempting to mold it to their own uses. The evolution of varied forms of welfare capitalism, the improved condition of workers in industrial societies, and the recent demise of the Communist bloc in Eastern Europe and Central Asia have tended to discredit Marx’s dire and deterministic economic predictions. The Soviet and Chinese Communist regimes did not result in the disappearance of the state, but in the erection of huge, monolithic, and largely inefficient state structures.

In recent years, many Western intellectuals have championed Marxism and repudiated Communism, objecting to the manner in which the two terms are often used interchangeably. A number have turned to Marx’s other writings and explored the present-day value of such Marxist concepts as alienation. Among prominent Western Marxists were the Hungarian philosopher Gyorgy Lukaisand the Italian political philosopher Antonio Gramsci, both of whom viewed Marxism as a liberation from the rule of political economy and believed in its relationship to the social consciousness. Marxism’s influence can be found in disciplines as diverse as economics, history, art, literary criticism, and sociology. German sociologist Max Weber, Frankfurt school theorists such as Theodor Adorno and Max Horkheimer, British economist Joan Robinson, German dramatist Bertolt Brecht, British literary critic Frederic Jameson, and the French historians of the Annales school have all produced work drawn from Marxist perspectives.

The import of social and technological interaction has been a subject of controversies over the year with two sides having different view of it. Technological determinists believe that technology determines the trend in social changes and history (Chandler, 2000). But the view of Social constructivists is different in the sense that they believe the social norms dictate technology both in design and usage (Trevor, 2010). This paper will try to look into each believe using a personal experience with time technology in relation to user role. Section 2.0 will shed light into believes of technological determinist using media Technology Determinism and Techno-evolution while section 3.0 will dwell on the Social shaping of technology using the Actor Network Theory (ANT) and Social Construction of technology theory (SCOT). Also, section 4.0 will explain what methodology that was used in accessing both theories while section 5.0 will show the findings in relation to both theories. The last section, section 6.0 will draw conclusion on what this paper believed in respect of the two theories.

2.0 Technological Determinism

The term Technological determinism was first used by an American called Thorstein Veblen in 1920s who believed that technology determines social change (Chandler, 2000). Technological determinism tends to believe that society is shaped by it most dominant technological innovation. Theories associated to Technological determinisms are Media technological determinism, Technological primacy, Technological imperative, Universalism and Techno-evolutionism (Chandler, 2000). This idea is based in two forms which are soft and hard determinism. The soft claims that technology determines social change but not absolute while the hard determinism claims that the force of technology is so big that it is autonomous (Joseph, 2004). Both ideas are based on cause which is technology and effect which is impact of it on the social norm.

Also, this view tends to explain technology in linear developmental stages without taking into consideration other adjoining factors. Technological determinist views social change as a dependant of technology. For example many determinists believe that communication technology determines the direction in which the society behaviour moves towards. Marshall McLuhan (1976) believed media deprive people of their private identity. He further describes this when he was criticizing that the media has negatively affected the life of people worldwide. He gave an example of a research conducted in Germany and UK where some people were paid not to watch television for some time. He said the result the agency discovered was reduction in drug addicted people.

Techno-evolutionism believes most world history is named after technological innovation. Examples of this are Machine age, age of automation, atomic age, industrial revolution, space age, communication age and so on (Chandler, 2000). This idea tends to focus on technological progress from generation to generation by the western world. Masse Bloomfield (1995) in his book “Automated Society” predicted that in the near future everybody will have what they want without physical effort. This he said would have serious impact on man’s social system. Also Jeremy Rifkin (1995) in his book “End of Work” reiterated that men will be substituted by machine. All this ideas are based on human over reliance in getting everything done with technology without thinking of the consequence it will have on them.

3.0 Social Shaping of Technology

The social constructivists believe that it is the society that shape technology. This theory based its own idea on different concept like the Empirical Programme of Relativism (EPOR), Actor Network Theory (ANT), Social Construction of technology (SCOT), Gender Studies (Consumption Junction) and many others. Also Social Constructivists believe users of technology determine the design and usability of it (Trevor, 2010). This paper will explain what is meant by two of the aforementioned concepts which are ANT and SCOT with examples.

ANT is a concept derived by Latour and Calon and it sees technology as a kind of battle between the users and the Script embedded in technology (Trevor, 2010). The theory deals with technology inform of network of actors on it (Trevor, 2010). He further describes it as a kind of “program” that is done on the assumption of user behaviour but users overcome this by “anti-program” (Trevor, 2010). An example of this is sit belt where the programm is if it is not worn then beep but user group not convenient with it i.e. Pregnant woman will fight this back by selling a dummy to the program (Anti-program) thereby plugging the sit belt in its socket to stop the beep (Trevor, 2010). This way the user is controlling the technology.

SCOT on the other part is an approach developed by both Trevor Pinch and Wiebe Bijker. It based its approach to research on Relevant Social Group, Interpretative Flexibility, Closure, influence of wider culture, Technological frame work and users as agents of technological change (Trevor, 2010). Bijeker (1997) argues using the evolution of Velocifere to Safety bicycle based on different user activity, that social group can change technology. Also Trevor (2010) argues that technology can be used for another purpose that is different from its original function. He gave an example of a car lifted up to power a washing machine. In another research work on Moog Synthesizer Trevor (2010) was able to proof that even invention is collaboration between inventor and the anticipated user. Social constructivist ideas points to Users as determinant of technology

4.0 Methodology

The methodology used is based on ‘Relevant Social Group’ approach by checking on users of time machine. The users include both male and female students in my class and watching of passerby students to see how they check time or whether they even have wrist watch at all. I also ask some questions from female students like what says your time to notice how it is been checked.

Also the technological effect on landscape is also considered using the site sightseeing observation along Clyde River and industrial evolution society using the visit to New Lanark.

The justification behind using the above approach is that it allows the researcher to use and relation with the current technology and society to bring out comparative analysis on the issue. Also the opinion will be neutral since deduction is from a different user without inclination into any of the theory of technology and society relationship.

5.0 Findings and implications

In getting the real life picture of the two argument, this section will try to analyze its finding using the analysis gotten from the sight seen along Clyde bank, visit to New Lanark and engagement with the time technology. History will play a major tool of analysis in illustrating the aforementioned.

5.01 River Clyde

Working along the Clyde River one will see a vivid notification of a once booming economic area of Scotland with traces of ship oil still floating on the river. The area has now been converted to recreational center due to the effect of world war two. In order to get the feel of this change this paper will start with a brief history of the River Clyde.

Years ago river Clyde is an haven for port activities with ship engineers locating their presence due to ship activities going on in the area. Technology play role in transforming the port to a trade hub. This was done by development of technology on steam engine and dredging of river clyde to open avenue for large ship. The dredging allowed large vessel to sail into Broomielaw instead of stopping at port outside the city (Clyde water front heritage). However, this activity was affected after the Second World War due to intense bombing of the Clyde side. Based on the shift towards tourism the Clyde river area has been turned to a relaxation area with side attractions like the Titan crane, BBC Scotland, Digital media quarter etc.

All this shows how technology can transform the landscape of a place which in turn changes the social way of doing things. Conversely, the changes are based on process in terms of the need by people. For example the idea behind the change is due to the need for improvement on sugar and tobacco trading by the people while technology also by dredging and construction of bridge change the landscape and ways of doing things.

5.0.2 Visit to New Lanark

The New Lanark visit shows how the industrial revolution age (Technological Determinist way of depicting era) changes the non active environment to a busy one. This transforms the landscape and increase social presence in the area.

History of New Lanark started with David Dale and his partner (Inventor), Richard Arkwright coming to the area. Both agreed in inventing in the area due to the availability of water fall to provide power for the proposed cotton mill. The idea is based on the feasibility of cotton production during the industrial revolution. Population of increased to 2,500 by the time the cotton industry started in 1786 (New Lanark Trust). Also the way the people uses power changed with the advent of transistor radio and pressing iron with villagers tapping power (ANT idea of Anti-programming). Although the power was supplied free to villager but it was later changed when the villagers were connected to the National grid due to increase in usage (Undiscovered Scotland). The clock tells the time to wake up and get prepared for work and also when the power is to be switched off and on. The whole story changed when the activities at the mill reduced and market declined. The population of villagers also decline with people moving out of New Lanark. New Lanark has now been rebuilt as a tourist center with influx of more than 50,000 tourists visiting the village per annum.

The above history also shows the relationship between technology and society. Some of the workshop visit really shows how technology controls workers. An example of this is the spinning machine which moves up and down at the same workers move to work in resonance with the machine. The noise of the machine is also there, although workers may not like it but due to the power of their employer and their own aim of earning their sustenance they have no option. The emigration of people from New Lanark also shows how technology can change society.

5.0.3 Engagement with time technology

Engagement with time technology through history of time measurement, and the struggle of getting accurate time in human endeavour shed more light into relationship between technology and society. Time measurement is one of fundamental to human existence. Barbara (2006) argues that our relation with time makes us human. This shows how important measuring of accurate time is important to human existence. This section will try to relate events with time and show how various usage has integrate technology as part of our ecosystem.

The history of time dated back to our existence with needs for time as sensational night and day. Need to know time of birth and death also highlights an important phase in the history of time. Thompson (1967, p.58) stated that “Cross River natives were reported as saying “the man died in less than the time in which maize is not yet completely roasted” (Cross River is a state in Nigeria) . It is noted in history of time that most nations in one way or the other use different means of measuring time. Most especially, they seems to concentrate more on use of celestial bodies like the sun, moon and different planet to measure months, season and years.

Because of the variation in night and day, necessity to divide the day into hours emerged. This was solved by a mathematician Hipparchus using his shadow to do theoretical math, he proposed 24 hours (Anon, 2011). At the same time the Greek has invented the mechanical water clock to measure time. This was the era of mechanical transformation from Natural mode of measurement. Suddenly knowing the hour of the day prompted research by the Greeks into minutes by measuring the angle the sun in different city at the same hour and comparing data (Anon, 2011). This enables them to reason not only shape of the earth but the size of it as well (Anon, 2011).

After solving the hour, finding time in different part of the world brings about the next problem of solving the mystery behind time. The scientists then were able to mark the latitude but longitude was a different ball game. In order to be able to measure accurate longitude you need to know the precise amount of time you wonder east or west and getting it was problematic (Anon, 2011). Problems that initiated research into longitude is the frequent lost of direction by ship on sea which most lead to it been perished (Anon, 2011). This prompted the British parliament in 1700 to offer cash reward to whoever can solve the problem (Anon, 2011). The problem was solved in 1730 by an English man named John Harrison who made the world first wine up clock power by spring (Anon, 2011).

The emergence of information age led to crave for most accurate time. Other instances that led to request for better time includes the temperature problem of the old watch, time dilation effect, need for greasing of the mechanical watches, measurement of data throughput, time measurement in space etc. the first that emerged was quartz which has the ability to measure time accurately at 1 second error in 270 years (Anon, 2011). The second entrant was Atomic clock which so far is the most accurate in term of measuring time. The fuel-like component in the Atomic clock can either be Cesium or Hydrogen maser (Vickie, 2012). An example of atomic watch usage is the General Position System (GPS) where concurrently three different satellites communicate with one another using their time to synchronize one another. The time must be very accurate to transform the position of an object using it. Now it is very hard to see user like in the olden days using landmark to locate addresses, they rather use Google map or its equivalent to find their way around cities.

Also my diary on usage of time machine shows that we use each machine in response to network effect of a dominant technology. The network effect theory talks about advantages user of technology gain from many network users of the same technology (Michael and Carl, 1985). Most people use wrist watch for show of status recently, while others like ladies uses it as ornament. For example, in my class we have six girls only two wears wrist watch consistently and when I ask for time from them they checked their phone not the wrist watch. I also ask the remaining girls they said why bordered when they are with their phone almost everywhere. The eight men in my class donaa‚¬a„?t wear wrist watch for the same reason but they accepted to wear it when going for party. Further engagement with this led me to watch most of the student passing by to see whether they wear wrist watch but discovered that most men are not wearing it but some ladies wear it. I also notice that most of the student are always looking down with their hand on their smart phones smiling intermittently and looking up slightly so as not to bump on other road users. Furthermore, some students have their hand in their side pocket with ear phone in their ear but this time they look up. This shows the extent to what extent technology can change the way we socialize. My view on this is that most people use their phone to check their time since they prefer to have every need in one place. They can use the phone to call, receive call, play mp3, chart, set alarm, check time, find their way etc. The usage depends on the user group view on what they want from the technology irrespective of the original function or design.

5.0.4 Implications

The implication of allowing technology to do what is meant for human instead of enhancing how human do things will have negative impaction on the society. This was explained by Butler (1872) when he stated that “Reflect upon the extraordinary advance which machines have made during the last few hundred years, and note how slowly the animal and vegetable kingdoms are advancing”. This means that technology development while helping the manufacturers of it to generate more revenue reduces human professionalism and at the same time have effect on the environment in terms of environmental pollution. One wonders what will happen if technological machine like time stopped working without having any alternatives like natural way of calculating time. Virtually everything stops when time stops. So this kind of important necessity should not be left in the hand of technology. In manufacturing technology there is need for consideration to be taken into its effect on the society and how such change can be managed.

Also, some technologies destroy the ones they met in market thereby making other users to be out of the system. Schumpeter explained this as destructive innovation (Tim, 2010, p.). Apart from user loosing the out-of-market technology, user might also have challenge in knowing how to use the new technology.

6.0 Conclusion

In conclusion, drawing from the above sections, it can be deduced that flows go both ways with technology having impact on social change and society have impact on technology irrespective of the idea behind Technological determinism and Social Constructivism. Both depend on each other but measure should be taken in reducing the excess of technological innovation to conform to the social safety of the society. Managers of technology in organization need to take technology as a supplement to human effort not has a supplement to the human itself. Also involvement of the frontline staff in technological implementation is paramount to management of change.

India has become an independent country, more than a half century ago. Our population has trebled after independence. This explosion has affected our development adversely. In recent times, corruption in different walks of life has grown tremendously. This has seriously undermined our progress and social life. Every society continues to changes with time. The process of shredding the old and accepting the new dispensation creates problems of adjustment. Our country is also confronted with some major social problems.

However, there are many areas in which Indian society is experiencing a variety of problems. Some of these problems have their roots in our colonial past while others are related to demographic changes, socio-political conditions and cultural processes. For example… We all have heard about the term illiteracy, 35% people of our country are illiterate even after 62 years of our independence.

Some of the major social problems of modern India are:-

POVERTY

RACISM

CORRUPTION

FEMALE FOETICIDE

DOWRY

HONOR KILLING

GENDER DISCRIMINATION

POVERTY

A large section of the Indian society is suffering from poverty. Poverty is a phenomenon which is objective as well a subjective. Objectively poverty implies a dehumanizing condition in which people are unable to look after the basic needs. Subjectively poverty stands for Perceived deprivation. Poor people lack the necessary resources and capacity to satisfy basic needs like food, shelter, health and education. They live under difficult conditions which are not conducive for development of their human potential. Poverty interferes with development in many ways. For instance lack of or inadequate nutrition arrests mental development during early childhood. A large section of poor children do not go to school. Even if they go they become drop outs and fail to complete education.

CAUSES OF POVERTY ARE:-

SOCIAL CAUSE:

ECONOMIC CAUSE:

POLITICAL CAUSE:

REIGIOUS CAUSE:

PHYSICAL CAUSES:

CORRUPTION

Corruption is an act by someone who is ready to do dishonest and illegal things in return of money or for something else they want, or behave in a way what is considered morally wrong. Corruption in our country is all pervasive and omnipresent. India is largest democracy of world. It is the second populous country of the world. India had cherished honesty, morality and also high values from time immemorial. With passage of time and fast socio-economic changes in the country, corruption has affected all walks of life. In our country corruption is existing in every sphere of life.

CAUSES OF CORRUPTION:

A number of causes are associated with the prevalence of corruption in our society. Some of them are aa‚¬” to make illegal things legal on the basis of bribe or commission, to acquire more and more wealth and consumer goods, high aspirations from jobs, to enhance status in the society, to pay dowry, to meet expenditure on technical and higher education of children, to get required no. for constituting and running the government, to collect money for fighting election, etc.

GENDER DISCRIMINATION

Women and men are equally important for the growth and development of individual and Social lives. The women play the important role as mother and the same makes it unique. However, careful analysis of Indian society indicates that the situation is not good for Women folk. The sex ratio of male and female in the India population has been changing and becoming unfavorable towards women. In the Indian society women are considered major contributors to family and society. We have gods and goddesses both and one of the incarnation of lord Shiva is Ardhanareeshwar, which is made of half male and half female in its constitution.

CAUSES OF GENDER DISCRIMINATION ARE:

Religion, family law, education, workplace discrimination, physical factors.

RACISM

Racism is the belief that race is a primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race. Or, on the opposite side, racism can be described as the belief that a certain race or races portray undesirable characteristicsA . In the case of institutional racism, certain racial groups may be denied rights or benefits, or receive preferential treatment. Racial discrimination typically points out taxonomic differences between different groups of people, although anyone may be discriminated against on an ethnic or cultural basis, independently of their somatic differences.

CAUSES OF RACISM:
Stereotypes: One of the most common causes of racism is stereotypes. Through television, through radio, through the internet, through music, through books, and the like, the potential for stereo types to build are a definite possibility.
Unfamiliarity: Another very common, and probably the most common cause of racism is unfamiliarity. People fear what they do not know or understand. If someone hasn’t grown up around a particular race before, then there is more of a chance the person can be racist toward that particular group.
Selfishness: Selfishness is another obvious cause of racism. Humans are sometimes very selfish creatures caring only about their own at the expense of others. If individuals aren’t taught how to respect others, then the potential
DOWRY

Dowry System in Indian Marriages can be called the commercial aspect of the marriage. The practice of giving dowry was very common among all people of all nations. A girl gets all the domestic utensils that are necessary to set up a family. Dowry system in India was prevalent since the Vedic period. In Epic period gifts from parents, brothers and relatives and relatives were recognized as woman`s property-stridhan. According to Kautilya “Means of subsistence or jewellery constitutes what is called the property of the woman. it is no guilt for a wife to make use of this property in maintaining her son her daughter-in-law or herself if her absent husband has made no provision for her maintenance”.

CAUSES OF DOWRY SYSTEM:

The poverty in India.

The low status of woman in past.

The orthodox mentality of the people in past.

FEMALE FOETICIDE

The killing of women exists in various forms in societies the world over. However, Indian society displays some unique and particularly brutal versions, such as dowry deaths and sati. Female foeticide is an extreme manifestation of violence against women. Female foetuses are selectively aborted after pre-natal sex determination, thus avoiding the birth of girls. As a result of selective abortion, between 35 and 40 million girls and women are missing from the Indian population. In some parts of the country, the sex ratio of girls to boys has dropped to less than 800:1,000. The United Nations has expressed serious concern about the situation.

CAUSES OF FEMALE FOETICIDE:

Dowry system where parents of the bride have to pay the groom’s family to marry their daughter. Higher the dowry, better the chances of a girl getting married. Of course, an unmarried girl is a blot on a family’s honor, which leads me to my next point.

Misplaced archaic cultural (nonsense) of girls being the ‘honor’ of the family. Sadly, this is true for a majority of cultures around the world, but some take it seriously enough to resort to murderous acts for the sake of ‘honor’ that is driven by super-sized inflatable male chauvinist egos.

Girls don’t propagate family name and neither does the family property stay in the same family.

HONOR KILLING

An honor killing or honour killing (also called a customary killing) is the murder of a (female) family or clan member by one or more fellow (mostly male) family members, where the murderers (and potentially the wider community) believe the victim to have brought dishonor upon the family, clan, or community. This perceived dishonor is normally the result of:-

(a) Utilizing dress codes unacceptable to the family.

(b) Wanting out of an arranged marriage or choosing to marry by own choice.

(c) Engaging in certain sexual acts or.

(d) Engaging in relations with the same sex.

These killings result from the perception that defense of honor justifies killing a person whose behavior dishonors their clan or family.

TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM

Steps Taken development by Government to Reduce Poverty are Small farmeraa‚¬a„?s development Programme, Drought area development Programme, Minimum needs Programme, Assurance on employment.

The Indian constitution should prohibits against such discrimination and has abolished Untouchability

The citizen of India should strictly follow the rules as considered in the constitution and should not perform the nefarious acts like female foeticide, bride burning, dowry, racism, gender discrimination etc

Women and men should be equally treated for the growth and development of individual and social lives.

Youth should make the organizations that having the agenda to eradicate these social problem in India by spreading awareness and demonstrations.

Government had put forward number of steps for woman empowerment like passing of women reservation bill in Rajya sabha

REFRENCES

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080622064535AAwPN1i

http://www.advancingwomen.com/politics/49842.php

http://nz.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071205033403AAe10lv

http://archive.thepoint.gm/youthf79.htm

http://www.vedamsbooks.com/no21045.htm

http://business.mapsofindia.com/india-economy/growth.html

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Role_of_youth_in_nation_building

http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/india_1900_to_1947.htm

http://www.rockymounttelegram.com/forced-annexation-land-grab-15430

http://arjelito.wordpress.com/

Day by day, the occurrence of social problems seems to increase rapidly. Social problems are issues or problems that may affect the people in a society, no matter it is directly or indirectly, and social problems are mainly related to moral values. Some of the major social problems that often occur in today’s world are drug abuse, crime, bullying, rape, kidnap, poverty, illegal migration, unemployment, truancy, obesity, gay marriage, racism, discrimination, abortion, family issues, marginalization, HIV, pollution, pre-marital sex, sex slavery – prostitution, child pornography and many more. The main social problem that will be discussed in this social psychology assignment will be focused on racism and also about the Africans being the target of racism, which had actually happened in Australia lately in the month of March to April, year 2010.

Racism, according to the Cambridge dictionary, is defined as the belief that people’s qualities are influenced by their race and that the members of other races are not as good as the members of your own, which results in other races being treated unfairly (Cambridge International Dictionary of English. [1889]-1894). Racism happens every day around the world regardless of any countries, even in Malaysia. Racism is a very sensitive issue as it discriminates and offends people of a certain race. Racism brings bad consequences as for it may result in causing racial destruction and disharmony among the people living in a particular country. Plus, racism also causes conflict and war, take the tragedy that happened on the 13th of May during the year 1969 in Malaysia for example. The problem caused is mainly due to racial politics, which is also related to racism. During an election on 1969, the Alliance tell off confidently that it would win more than two thirds of the 144 seats in the Dewan Rakyat or about two thirds of the 104 Peninsular Malaysia seats, take over Kelantan, and take control of all the other states. When the results were out, the Alliance had won only 66 seats, down from the 89 it won in 1964. Alliance also lost Penang, failed to take over Kelantan, and almost lose Perak, Selangor, Kedah and Terengganu. Even the Opposition was very surprised with the outcome, too. The Opposition supporters, especially the Chinese and Indians who had voted for the DAP and Gerakan were proud and joyful. They celebrated their “victories” by marching through Kuala Lumpur and shouted insulting and offending epithets at Malays, such as, “Melayu balik kampung, kita sudah berkuasa skarang” (“Malays, return to your villages, we are now in power”) and “Hei Sakai bolih balik ke hutan” (“Hey Sakai, you can return to the jungle”).and also showed vulgar gestures at the Malay women. Street clashes then broke out between the Malays with Chinese and Indian youths. Even parang – which is a type of big straight knife used in Malaysia and indonesia, sticks and iron pipes were used. Many lives were sacrificed on that day itself just because of a group of racist doing unnecessary acts. (www.malaysianbar.org.my)

Speaking of racism, the Africans living in Australia had, unfortunately, became the target of racism in the form of harassment by the Australian policemen. “The police picked me up, they put me in the back of the car. Then they took me to (locality withheld) and beat me up, and they left me there” a young African background said in a new study into the treatment of youths of African background by Australian police in Melbourne. It is shocking to know and realize the fact that young African-Australians in the country are overruled by Australian policemen. What’s worst and unfortunate is that the police harassment that were happening all the while is either not reported or insufficient investigates by the relevant oversight bodies, and those irresponsible and racist policemen often resort to hostility and aggression when young people assert their rights. Most of them had been experiencing terrible and often violent experiences with the Victoria state police officers which include harassment, racist comments and serious assaults. Other than that, one of the interviewee has reported being racially abused, bullied, spat on and slapped by the policemen before being taken to a police station where he was beaten up for about ten minutes. Right after the youth is being released at the back door of the police station, the youth re-entered the building once again at the front entrance, telling the officer who was on duty that time that he wanted to lodge a report and also make a complaint. According to the youth, the officer then called one of the policemen who had beaten the youth up. Instead another policeman went in and warned him that if the youth doesn’t get out of the police station at that very instance, he would pull him back in and beat him up again. Helplessly and disappointedly, the youth left the police station without a word (http://www.globalissues.org/news/2010/04/12/5175).

Racism mainly happens due to the stubbornness and ignorance of a certain group of people from all races, be it Australians, Malays, Chinese, Indians, Africans and others. Those people who are racist most probably are feeling self-superior. They wanted to glorify their own races so badly that they discriminate and disrespect people of other races, in other words they are trying to bring down other races’ pride and image to feel satisfied and proud of their own races, which is related to the theory of aggression – an intentional behavior aimed at doing harm or causing pain to another person (Social Psychology Sixth Edition,2005). Hence, that is how racism occurs. In fact, most people also believe that racism is developed through one or two outcomes. It is either that some of the people were raised that way, or on the other case is that there may be someone from a different race did something really unpleasant hateful to a particular person of another race and the latter in turn take it out on all people of that particular race where the former belongs.

In order to overcome racism, one should judge other people by their actions, not by the color of their skin. Within all races, there are sure to have those people who would have bad intentions, steal from others or try to dominate others. Instead of seeing these people as part of a group based upon race, one should see and judge them as individuals with problems on their own. Besides that, one also has to be brave to speak up when others make insulting jokes and statements regarding racism towards others. By letting people around a particular person know that he or she do not agree to racist thoughts, he or she is actually giving the people permission to think for themselves, if it is possible, one can also explain why it’s wrong to judge people by their race without getting boiled up. Along the way, he or she should also help those people who are victimized by prejudice. If one came across an incident where someone is targeted by the color of his or her skin, he or she should take the initiative to confront those who are practicing racism and point out the error and consequences of their thoughts. Lastly, which is also most importantly, one must live his or her life as if he or she were born to be colorblind. One can do that by looking past one’s skin and into one’s heart. By all people doing so, everyone would not have racist thoughts and hence avoiding the occurrence of racism. That will also produce a healthier and peaceful environment for the younger generations as because they learn through what they see from the actions and thoughts of the elder generations. (www.ehow.com )

As a conclusion, racism is a negative issue that brings bad consequences to all people around the world. The theory that can be related to racism will be prejudice, which is a hostile or negative attitude toward a distinguishable group of people, based solely on their membership in that group (Social Psychology Sixth Edition,2005). Racism is exactly about being prejudice. Being racist is equivalent to being unfair, rude, unpleasant, impolite, irresponsible, disrespectful and ignorant. Because of racism, many people had sacrificed their lives during the past. Some countries even had civil wars. Therefore, to avoid those unpleasant things from happening again and to avoid repeating the same old mistakes the older generations had done, racist thoughts in people’s minds should be avoided and stopped immediately, especially the people living in Malaysia, which consists of different races – Malays, Chinese, Indians and others. The world will certainly be a better place to live in if there are no more issues of racism.

APPENDIX
Rights-Australia: Africans Target of Racism, Harassment by Police

by Stephen de Tarczynski (Melbourne, Australia)

Monday, April 12, 2010

Inter Press Service

The police ‘picked me up, they put me in the back of the car. Then they took me to (locality withheld) and beat (expletive) me, and they left me there,’ a young person of African background said in a new study into the treatment of youths of African background by Australian police in Melbourne.

The ‘Interventions into Policing of Racialised Communities in Melbourne’ report, released in mid-March, is part of a project into racism here managed by three community legal services in Australia.

It found that young African-Australians in the country’s second-largest city are over-policed, that police harassment and violence is either under-reported or inadequately investigated by the relevant oversight bodies, and that police often resort to hostility and aggression when young people assert their rights.

Thirty youths, 27 males and 3 females aged 15 to 27, were interviewed for the study. Many had Sudanese or Somali backgrounds.

Most of them had been subjected to negative and often violent experiences with Victoria state police officers, including harassment, racist comments and serious assaults. None were identified in the study for fear of potential police retribution.

One interviewee reports being racially abused, spat on and slapped around the head by police before being taken to a police station where he was ‘beaten up for about ten minutes.’

After being released though the station’s rear exit, the youth re-entered the building at the front entrance, telling the officer on duty that he wished to make a complaint. According to the youth, the officer then ‘called one of the coppers that were beating me up. Another copper came in and goes to me, ‘If you don’t get out of here now, I’ll pull you back in’. And I left.’

Tredwell Lukondeh, president of the Sydney-based Federation of African Communities Council (FACC), says that he is not surprised by the report’s findings. ‘What is surprising is the degree to which the report highlights the problems. We do have concerns from various community leaders about the issue in question,’ Lukondeh told IPS.

The FACC, which groups African groups from around Australia, is now collating data regarding police treatment of African-Australians to present to both the police force and the state government. But Victoria Police Chief Commissioner Simon Overland argues that police have done much to strengthen relations with different ethnic communities, including the African community. These efforts include community forums, the appointment of more multicultural officers, police-youth camps and joint sports activities.

Overland says that tension between police and young immigrants ‘is not a new problem.’

‘With every wave of migration we’ve had problems with youths. If you go back far enough it was the Italian wave, the Greek wave, the Vietnamese wave and what we’re seeing now is a wave of migration coming out of Africa. And predictably we’re seeing tensions with youth,’ Overland told the Australian Broadcasting Commission’s local radio in March.

While no African nation was among the top 10 source countries of the more than 158,000 people migrating permanently to Australia in the 12 months prior to Jun. 30, 2009 – the latest period for which figures are available – Australia’s African community has swelled in recent years.

Africans have figured prominently among recent visa recipients under Australia’s humanitarian programme, which is reserved for refugees and others requiring protection.

Nationals of Sudan, Ethiopia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Somalia, Liberia and Sierra Leone were among the top 10 countries of origin for humanitarian visas granted in the 2008-2009 year.

Although Lukondeh admits that police have taken positive steps to address issues with African-Australians, he believes that much more can be done. ‘We should establish that corridor of learning about the cultural background of new immigrants. It is very important because, in essence, it’s that ignorance that enflames these problems,’ said the FACC president.

Any progress made by police efforts to create better relations appears to be undermined by the report’s findings as well the revelation of a racist email circulating among Victoria police officers.

While Overland has vowed to take action against officers in the wake of the report ‘if there is evidence to support those allegations,’ up to 100 officers are purported to be under investigation in relation to the email, which local media have reported depicts a man being tortured.

The report into police treatment of youth of African backgrounds comes as the furore over allegedly racially motivated attacks on Indians in Australia – and Melbourne in particular – appears to be fading.

It follows November’s findings by the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) – a statutory body responsible for media regulation – that three popular Melbourne television broadcasters breached the Commercial Television Codes of Practice in 2007 in reports regarding Sudanese refugees in Melbourne’s south-east.

ACMA found that the news reports of channels Ten, Nine and Seven, which focused on racial tensions, gangs and the decision by the government of former Prime Minister John Howard to reduce the intake of African refugees, were inaccurate.

Ten and Nine breached the regulatory body’s fair and impartial requirement for news presentations. ‘ACMA considered that both of their segments contained an unfair selection of material, were unfairly juxtaposed and created an unfair presentation, overall, of Sudanese people as being particularly prone to commit violence and crime,’ said ACMA’s statement.

© Inter Press Service (2010) – All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service

Domestic violence is the biggest social problem facing America today. It is among the most devastating experiences that adversely affect women and children in the US. Children who witness or experience, DV may become future abusers or victims themselves if society doesn’t get involved. The federal government needs to step in and assume responsibility in stemming the tide of domestic violence. Preventing abuse is more cost-effective than paying for the consequences of abuse. The widespread occurrence of such violence takes an immense toll on the lives of the victims in addition to most of society, because of numerous behavioral, health, psychological, and economic consequences.

Why women bear domestic violence?

Following are some justifications given by women to remain victim of domestic violence for the rest of the life:

Helplessness

A lot of women who are a victim of domestic violence are financially dependent on their abusers. There are numerous reasons for this; an abuser will often try to isolate the victim from anybody or anything that might offer support either emotionally or economically. This allows the abuser to have power over his victim, without interference from those who might give aid to the victim. This isolation causes the victim to become dependent on her abuser, and it insures that she will have nowhere to go. Even when a victim has the wish to escape the violence, the fundamental requirements of food, shelter, and clothing for her children usually surpass her need for security. To leave a domestic violence relationship, a woman needs a place to live, a source of income, childcare and transportation. Most victims are denied access to these things in a vicious relationship, leaving her escape resources insolvent.

The trickiest issue a victim must beat in order to get away is her fear of her abuser’s threats to kill her. Alas, this fear is not always baseless. Abusive men often shoot up violence after a victim flees to security and time and again he brings back his victim and her children. Indeed, as many as 75% of visits to medical emergency rooms by battered women occur after they have separated from the aggressive partner.

The Forms of Abuse

Physical Abuse includes hitting, shoving, choking, biting, kicking, slapping, punching, pulling hair, burning, bruising, twisting, preventing access to an exit, or using a weapon to bully and/or intimidate.

Emotional Abuse is the hardest for women to remain alive her self identify. Emotional abuse is the systematic degrading of the victim’s self-esteem. This may be accomplished by withholding of love, intimidation, mocking; cruelty to pets, using put-downs, giving the details of relationships, refusing to talk, showing jealousy, refusing to allow a partner to have/make friends, taking anger out on the children and pets, not allowing the victim financial access or convincing the victim that she (the victim) is crazy.

Sexual Abuse can include forcing sex against a partner’s will, forbidding birth control, physically hurting partner during sex, oral abuse including humiliating sexual comments, forcing unwanted sexual practices on partner, hiding a sexually transmitted disease from partner, and forced sex with objects.

Economic Abuse is accomplished by preventing the victim from working outside the home, not permitting the victim to make any economic decisions, having to justify all expenditure, baseless blaming for monetary troubles, withholding of financial information, and withholding access to finances.

Characteristics of an Abuser

*The majority of abusers are emotionally deprived.

*Abusers want to feel in control; they use aggression as a means to control their partner.

*Abusers are likely to behave normally toward other family members, friends and work acquaintances.

*They are generally very unconfident and insecure. Overwhelming their victim gives them a sense of power.

*Abusers are habitually very critical of their partner.

*They can be exceedingly jealous.

*Abusers often reject blame for their actions and can even deny that any abuse ever happened.

*They reduce the abuse and blame their partners for their violent behavior.

The Sequence Of Abuse

1. Tension Building

Minor incidents occur and tension begins to build. The victim generally tries to control the situation by apologizing, making promises and accepting blame. The victim will generally seek to “smooth things over” and solve the problem in order to reduce the aggression.

2. Attack

Tension rises until there is verbal abuse that will often lead to physical aggression. Victims often play down or reject the brutality of their injuries to pacify their perpetrators with the hope of preventing more violence. Pleading from the victim during this phase usually only serves to increase the violence.

3. Apologies and pardon

The abuser acts sorry and seems confused by his actions; generally the abuser starts to cry. The abuser promises to ‘never do it again’. The victim focuses on how loving her abuser can be. In relationships that do not have the ‘apology’ stage the victim is likely to leave their abuser sooner and is less likely to return to the relationship. Records show that there is a direct link between the apology stage and a victim’s willingness to stay in the relationship.

Occurrence of Domestic Violence

aˆ? Estimates range from 960,000 incidents of violence against a current or former spouse, boyfriend, or girlfriend per year to three million women who are physically abused by their husband or boyfriend per year.

aˆ? Nearly one-third of American women (31 percent) report being physically or sexually abused by a husband or boyfriend at some point in their lives, according to a 1998 Commonwealth Fund survey.

aˆ? Thirty percent of Americans say they know a woman who has been physically abused by her husband or boyfriend in the past year.

aˆ? Intimate partner violence is primarily a crime against women. In 1999, women accounted for 85 percent of the victims of intimate partner violence (671,110 total) and men accounted for 15 percent of the victims (120,100 total).

aˆ? The most rapid growth in domestic relations caseloads is occurring in domestic violence filings. Between 1993 and 1995, 18 of 32 states with three-year filing figures reported an increase of 20 percent or more.

Conclusion

It is clear from the facts collected that the solution to averting domestic violence is in education. It is particularly essential; to teach young people that violence is not an acceptable answer to any problem. We must bring domestic violence to the forefront of our society and not allow it to be a forbidden issue. We must definitely strengthen the value of each person in our society.

To help those already involved in violent relationships there must be more spotlights on the self-worth issues of the victim. Once a victim has confidence she is more likely to leave a violent relationship.

Economic programs must be prepared in a community in order to take away an abuser’s second biggest weapon- financial control. There is an enormous requirement for more ‘safe-houses’ in America. Domestic Violence Shelters provide a safe shelter for women and children to escape the violence.

Lastly we must teach our school children about domestic violence. They must be taught from an early age that violence is never allowable and give them the tools needed to identify domestic violence and how to get help if required.

It is understandable from all information that violence itself cannot be the subject of mediation and that mediation is not a substitute for counseling, education, and legal sanctions. This led to the clearest guideline, that no criminal cases involving domestic violence should be referred to mediation. The violent act or acts must be dealt with through the actual court procedure in order to highlight the gravity of the act and the fact that domestic violence, where proved, is indeed against the law.

Untouchability is the social practice of casting out a minority group by regarding them as “ritually polluted” and segregating them from the mainstream. The excluded group could be one that did not accept the norms of the excluding group and historically included foreigners, nomadic tribes, law-breakers and criminals. This exclusion was a method of punishing law-breakers and also protected against contagion from strangers. A member of the excluded group is known as an untouchable. The people who are said untouchable are from that section of society which is not only held in the lowest esteem, but which is behaved by the other castes as unclean. Who are found to be the sweepers, cleaner, and leather tanners are considered as unfit for human society or co-mingling. They are not permitted to take their water from the public wells.

The word caste was loosely used by the Portuguese to denote the Indian social classification as they thought that the system was intended to preserver purity of blood. The system is such a peculiar and complex thing that no satisfactory definition is possible. Hence we find no unanimity among scholars on the subject. Senart states that ‘a caste is a close corporation, exclusive and in theory at any rate rigorously hereditary. It is equipped with ascertain traditional and independent organization, including a chief and a council, meeting on occasion in assemblies endowed with less full authority.

According to sir H. Risley, ‘a caste may be defined as a collection of families or groups of families bearing a common name, claiming common descent from a mythical ancestor, human or divine, professing to follow the same hereditary calling, and regarded by those who are competent to give opinion as forming a single homogeneous community .the name generally denotes or is associated with a specific occupation. A caste is almost invariably endogamous in the sense that a member of the large circle denoted by the common name may not marry outside that circle, but within the circle there are usually a number of smaller circles each which is also endogamous.’ The ‘untouchables’ have been referred to as Schedule Castes and Schedule Tribes. Local names for the ‘untouchables’ are in different parts of India and known by different names: Bhangi, Pakhi, Chandal, etc. Mahatma Gandhi called them Harijans, which means children of God. It is still in wide use especially in Gandhi’s home state of Gujarat. Harijans are now Dalits, which means broken people.

Historical background:

Hindu culture was made of four castes according to work of people. There are the brahmins, the highest or scholarly people, kshatriya, the caste of the ancient kings or warriors; the vaisya, the farmers and traders; and the sudras, laborers. The people, who come under the sudras caste, are treated with disdain, but not as outcasts. Today, the caste system is become more complicated and having many subdivisions, each forming a social organization whose function is to protect caste members. In Manu Smriti there is written that the first part of a Brahmin’s name should denote something auspicious, a Kshatriya’s name should be connected with power, and that a Vaishya’s name should reminds wealth. The first part of a Sudra’s name should express something contemptible and the second part should describe the service, because of the Sudra’s low origin. According to Hindu practice, only the upper castes are given right to study the Vedas. ‘If the Sudra intentionally listens for committing to memory the Veda, then his ears should be filled with molten lead and lac; if he utters the Veda, then his tongue should be cut off, if he has mastered the Veda his body should be cut to pieces’ says the Manu Smriti. In the epic Ramayana, after Lord Rama’s return from exile, a Brahmin accuses him of causing the death of his son by his toleration of Shambuka, a Sudra who recited the Vedas. In order to control the situation, Rama finds Shambuka and killed him. The Brahmin boy got life again. In Manu Smriti different punishments are given for the same ‘crime’, depending on the culprit’s caste. If this much punishments were for the Sudras, what was the treatment reserved for the ‘untouchables’ who were outside the caste system, and placed even lower than the Sudras in society. In the 1500s, during the rule of the Marathas and the Peshwas ‘untouchables’ were not allowed within the gates of the Poona between 3.00 pm and 9.00 am. The reason was that during this time their bodies were casting long shadows, with the reason that the shadow of an ‘untouchable’ might fall on a Brahmin and pollute him. An ‘untouchable’ used to carry an earthen pot around his neck so his spittle might not pollute the earth by the shadow. In Maharashtra an ‘untouchable’ wore a black thread either in his neck or on his wrist for ready identification of upper caste people, while in Gujarat a horn was being worn for identification. It must be remembered that Dalit does not mean Caste or low-Caste or poor; it refers to the deplorable state or condition to which a large group of people has been reduced by social convention and in which they are now living.

Protection under constitution:

India’s government and legal system when dealing with dalits or ‘untouchables’ is fraught with contradiction. This is evident in the disparities between upper and lower castes, in terms of economic and political power, and is a consequence of the States differential treatment of these sections. The Indian Constitution – the writing of which was chaired by the most powerful dalit advocate for dalit rights, Dr. Ambedkar embodies civil and legal rights providing for non-discrimination. However, secular legal and constitutional structures are contradictory to the prevalent ancient Hindu law: religious, social and economic practices that involve a discriminative hierarchy based on hereditary social status, occupation and ritual duties. Stratification of society benefits the upper classes as it secures positions of economic and social power, and allows the exploitation of the lower castes; Hindu beliefs and law sanction this. It is therefore not in their interest to remove discrimination by the implementation of the constitutional principles and laws in favors of the dalits. The Indian state hasn’t, to date, taken a serious approach to the betterment of the dalit situation because it is essentially aligned with the upper castes. The provision of reservations for government seats, employment and higher education has improved the living standard of some dalits, yet most remain in poverty. Reservations provide positive discrimination; ironically this also stereotypes dalits, resulting in their continual segregation in society. The state has not successfully provided due access to education, equitable employment, ownership of land and legal protection to break the cycle of caste based oppression. Dalit political parties and movements for the assertion of rights and self determination have been numerous and varied, but have been successfully quelled by the state and upper castes through the use of political power, violence, and police intimidation, all contrary to the constitution.

Hindus maintain the caste system because their religion requires them to do so, and caste is a characteristic of Brahmanism, the Brahmans being at the top of the system.1 Dalits, as they will be referred to here, are a sub caste of people at the bottom of the Hindu social and religious hierarchy called Varna Dharma; due to polluting nature of their occupations which include

handling dead animals, cleaning, and jobs to do with human excrement. They are forced to behave in de-humanizing ways such the eating of excrement. The interaction of the castes and

1 L.G. Havanur, Backward Classes, Judicial Meaning, Socio-legal Services and Research Centre, Bangalore, 1991, p.55

jatis, or endogamous sub divisions relating to occupation, is known as the jajmani system. Hindus have relied on this system to divide labour, social and commensally relations and ensure economic and social co-operation.2 On every level the dalits have been discriminated against, and subordinated into servitude.3 Ambedkar in his leadership role in the Indian constituent assembly sought to erase the oppressive caste system by raising dalit awareness and empowerment through provisions in the constitution. Article 15 and 17 prohibits the practice of untouchability and discrimination based on caste.4 In hindsight, these basic aims seem too lofty to be realized, given that dalits still remain disenfranchised in relation to the implementation of these articles. Forty years later, writing in 1994, Dr. B.D Sharma describes the Indian micro-universe as separated into the ‘first world,’ where people exercise their rights and have access to courts and police for protection under the law and ‘the other world’ where people do not.5 The first world comprises of only 15-20% of the population and the other world makes up the majority of ‘disinherited’ and exploited people.6 In addition, The Civil Rights Protection Act, 1955, intended to abolish disabilities associated with backward classes including dalits. While creating an atmosphere where the inequalities suffered by the dalits have been publicly condemned, the constitutional measures have been rendered ineffective as they are mostly ignored in practice.7 Dalits make up 77% of agricultural labour which is classified as unskilled and unorganised. In the urban setting, they are labourers in construction, scavengers and sanitation workers, also falling into the unorganized category. Wages in the organized sector are regulated by the State so that they rise with increased prices, and are adequate enough for one wage earner to sustain a family. Labourers bear the brunt of the disparity between organized and unorganized sections. Violations of minimum wage, set very low in the first place, and payment in kind are common, and go unchecked.8 Consequently, one wage cannot support a family and children and the elderly are forced to work, children don’t go to school and are trapped by poverty.9 The State allows illegal labour practices because exploitation results in economic benefits for landowners and employers who are mostly upper caste, if it should interfere, more

2 Sumit Ganguly & Neil DeVotta eds, Understanding Contemporary India, Lynne Rienner Publishers, Boulder, London, 2003, p.233 -234

3 Robert.W.Stern, Changing India, 2nd edit, Cambridge university press, Cambridge, 2003. p.60-61

4 Sumit Ganguly & Neil DeVotta eds, Understanding Contemporary India, p.243

5 Dr. B.D. Sharma, Dalits Betrayed, Har-Anand Publications, New Delhi, 1994, p.13

6 Ibid. 7Robert.W.Stern, Changing India, 2nd edit, p. 242

8 Prem.K.Shinde ed, Dalits and Human Rights, volume 1, (Dalits and Racial Justice) Isha Books, Delhi, p.84

9 Dr. B.D. Sharma, Dalits Betrayed, p.47

dalits may be able to enter the organised sector, and thus this exploitable labour resource would be drained. Although this massive failure of participation in the organised economy could be corrected by affirmative action policies, these have also been insufficient.

Article 330 and 332 of the constitution call for affirmative action in the form of special reservations in government representation, government employment and higher education,

intended to raise the dalit position in society. Reserved seats are allocated in the Lok Sabha, and the legislative assemblies of the states, effectively giving dalits representation.

The scheduled castes and scheduled tribes (The Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 was designed to better punish offences such as injury or harassment directed at dalits. In addition, Article 14 of the constitution states that no citizen be denied equality before the law. Ghandi believed that the superior/inferior relations between dalits and upper castes could not be remedied by the state, but needed to be addressed by the upper castes themselves who were responsible for the system.10

10 Lelah Dushkin, Scheduled Caste Policy in India, p.632

Untoucability, A social Evil:

Untouchability is basically not from India. It was practiced in parts of Europe until a few centuries ago, and Japan still has a large number of “Untouchables”, called the ‘Burakumin’. But it is in the Indian Sub-continent that this system survives, closely bound with culture, religion, history and politics. Today over 170 million people in India are considered Untouchable, and their development has been slow despite the Legal safeguards and the Government programs. According to the ‘Manu Smriti’ there are four castes in Hindu society and each caste has assigned duties, responsibilities and privileges. The Brahmins are the learned, the Kshatriyas are the warriors, the Vaishyas are the traders, and the Sudras perform menial tasks and physical labour, and are considered as the lowest. And only uppers castes have the right to study the Vedas. The upper castes alone have the right to the thread ceremony which is performed as a rite of passage, allowing them to be termed twice-born.

What is a Dharma?

A study reveals that “he who has the knowledge of Brahmagnan is called the Brahmana”, and not by caste or not by the birth. Each one of us is an untouchable, because who among us is free from disobedience to Nature’s laws, from impurity of heart and mind, from fears of a thousand kinds, from selfishness and greed. Let us remove the untouchability in us. Anyone is not perfect, but through right dharma, by eliminating our differences and by strengthening our virtues, we move towards perfection. Let us develop the virtue of efficiency and skill to become Shudras; the virtue of charity and become Vaishyas; the courage and become Kshatriyas; the sacrifice and become Brahman, and make ourselves in the copy of the Great Purusha, the Radiant.

According to the “Bhagwadgeetha” or “The Bible” or any other, written, or said, is the same, that all humans are equal. The Air we breathe, the Water we drink, the Fire, the Sky, the Earth are same. These days Indian students and citizens are being attacked in some countries, and we are discussing and talking about the “RACISM” and craving for justice. We should condemn these at any cost, but it would be fair if we stop those things in here.

What is Untouchability?

Untouchability in India is a practice where a particular community considers even touching another community person as polluting one. A person who touches the untouchables is usually made to undergo cleansing process, like bathing, or spraying of water, depending on the regional practice.

Who practices untouchability?

There is an intense propaganda that untouchability is practiced by higher caste people over lower caste people. But that is no right. Untouchability is practiced by almost all castes, right from brahmin caste to the dalit caste. Even the dalit castes practice untouchability over others. One dalit caste will not even drink water from another dalit caste.

Does Untouchability mean segregation?

Segregation in western sense, means, classification and isolating a certain groups of people, for varied reasons. Segregation is mostly associated with authority based society like the western one. Normally, the criminals, rebels, and other anti-social elements only are segregated from the mainstream society, and deported to far off lands or put in jail. This is what happened in the western societies.

In general, segregation means, separation of different groups of people from one another, and no relationship exists among these groups. For example, in Europe, the protestants and the catholics are segregated, and there is no healthy relationship b/w them, except for that both worship jesus. Similarly, shias and sunnis are segregated people, without any interdependence. But, untouchability does not mean segregating. Because, untouchability was mutually practiced by all groups. In caste system, even though people practiced untouchability, the different castes are interdependent on one another, thus always having some kind of interaction and relationship.

Does Untouchability mean isolation?

Definitely not, there may be segregation of houses of castes in some villages. But there is never isolation in any villages. Almost all castes interact with each other, because, all castes depend on one another for some needs. The level of interaction differs from caste to caste. For example, the dalits will strictly not mingle with other dalit caste, eg. Sakkiliars will never drink water from parayars. But, they will get food and water from the dominant caste of that region. Similarly, the dominant castes like chettiyars, devars, nayakkars, etc may have interactions on equal footing. But still, they do not mingle with one another.

There are few communities, who have to closely interact with one another. Particularly in kongu region, the naavithars, vannan community, kosavar community, etc have close interaction with the dominant gounder community. The naavithars (barbers) usually conduct most of the rituals, right from birth to death in the gounder’s family. It is they who used to sing mangazha vaazhthu during gounder’s marriage.

Why does a caste practice untouchability?

There is no definite answer to this, as the reason may vary from place to place. But based on my understanding, untouchability is practices because of extreme cultural contradictions. Let me list out the possible reasons for untouchability, as i perceive.

Life style: We all know India is a land of cultural diversity, and that the life style of one community largely differs from others. For eg, a brahmin community follows strict hygiene, and are strict vegetarians. On the other hand, the farmers and farm laborer castes usually work in fields; do not have hygienic life practices. The dalit community works on cow skins, which is a sin to brahmin community. So it’s natural that the brahmins could not mingle with other castes.

Commune Living: Most of the castes live a strong commune life, with a common profession. So, the life styles of all the community members are aligned towards that lifestyle. And there are strong inter dependencies among the community member. In such commune living, people used to live as large families, with common interest. In such cases, when a member of the family or community, elopes with the other community girl or boy, it creates a confusion in the large family. The incoming girl/boy may not adapt to the family life style, and may not adapt to the community profession. For example, a brahmin girl will not be able to work in fields if she marries a farmer. Or a farming girl may not be able to work in leather products if she marries a dalit. So, the society has evolved itself to an inbuilt arrangement, not to mingle with each other.

Prisoners of war: On those days (before Muslim invasion), when a king was defeated in a war, he captures the prisoners of war, and deports to his kingdom to work as laborers or current empire may be ruled by the enemy for few years, and recaptured by the original king. In such case, the people settled there by the former temporary ruler, may lose their status, and become laborers. In such cases, the victorious king may take steps to suppress the settled external people, so that they don’t again attempt to overthrow him.

Religious Differences: I need not mention about Hindu Muslim differences. That is entirely a different subject. However, there are many sub sects within Hinduism, which had opposed each other. Particularly the influence of Buddhism had profound impact on suppressing those people who work on leather products, as Buddhist believed in ahimsa. The vegetarian character of India is believed to have acquired during Buddhist rule. Also, since anyone who left the caste is usually abandoned by the community, those who had converted to Buddhism might have been left out after Buddhism waned way. Today, for many of the dalit people, their kula deivam is Vishnu.

Cultural Differences: Apart from life style, the cultural values of the castes also an important reason for untouchability. For example, the ruling castes had stricter cultural values, which they have followed for generations. For example, widow remarriage is not allowed in dominant castes. But it’s normal in dalit castes. The widow in dominant caste often follows sati, whereas it is not required in the dalit castes.

Lineages: The common culture and profession resulted in a common lineage over centuries, which evolved the respective castes in to distinctive identities, which had made them not to mingle with others.

Exceptions from Untouchability:

The saints and rishis are mostly exempted from untouchability. It means, almost all communities welcomed rishis and saints, and the saints also embraced all communities. Also, the saints are placed outside the caste system, as they have raised one level above in their life, towards the god. Most of the kings never practiced untouchability, and they were mostly secular. Moreover, they did not have the situation or the time to do that. Good and Bad in this world are highly relative term rather than a universally defined one. In the society of barbarians, murderers and rapists, a thief could be the best person among others. However, in a society of saints and nobles, the same thief would be the worst person. Thus when we are judging anything as good/bad, we need to consider the environment and prevailing situation.

There was heavy propaganda of dalit oppression and suppression by the Marxists, for around a century here. But even assuming their propaganda to be true, let’s see how the dalit people were treated here. The dalits lived in a separate colony in the same village. The dalits are not slaves. They were mere laborers to the land owners. They have the right to move to other village, if they feel, the current village is discriminatory or not able to live in. A typical dalit community is allowed to have their own commune life, simply because, untouchability prevented the dominant caste from abusing or exploiting them. The dalits had their own temple, their own festivals.

The dalits had similar type of caste structure, with gothrams and kula deivams. A dalit married from a different gothram of his caste from another village. These ensured that the dalit people also had relations among multiple villages and have their own social structure to follow with. Since the dalit people were allowed to live as a community, their women had the inherent protection from exploitation. In the case of American slave system each African women is an individual slave, which the owner can do whatever he want. Other slaves cannot come to rescue if the owner rapes the slave women. However, in our caste system, the women were part of the dalit community, and they could not be exploited. Also, since the dominant caste practiced untouchability over the dalits, their youths refrained from mingling with dalit girls; as such an act would excommunication from his caste. It is same for the dalit people too.

The dalit people had their own panchayat for issue resolution. This is the highest point of freedom that any community might have. The elders in the dalit caste usually try to solve the problem. If that fails, they take the case to the village panchayat head.

To quote a recent history of India, the entire Kashmir valley had been ethnically cleansed of Hindus, just because the Muslims could not tolerate the presence of Hindus. So when they became majority they persecuted the Hindus. However, it has to be noted that the Hindus, even though invaded by Muslims were able to tolerate them for thousands of years, by simply practicing untouchability. There are many other instances in the history where I find that untouchability would have prevented genocides, persecution and other horrors of the history. Comparing those incidents with our caste system, we find that untouchability is a practical system evolved as a solution to peaceful existence of conflicting communities.

We all know that the urban people are classified as higher class, middle class and lower class. But it’s a fact that these class peoples mostly lived isolated from others. For example, the higher class people live in posh areas, with neat roads, electricity water facility and spacious homes, public parks etc. The middle class usually lives in comfortable homes, but in congested areas. The lower class people often were the slum dwellers who live in unhygienic and horrific conditions.

Let me ask the following questions:

How many upper class people live along with slum dwellers? Suppose a slum dweller roams in front of a posh bungalow, what will the security of the bungalow will do? We often find that the rich people drive away the slum people through their securities. How many of the higher class people allow their children to play with middle class people? How many of the middle class people allow their children to play with the slum boys & girls?

In villages, even though castes follow untouchability, each caste knows the members of the other caste. When the dalit caste had any needs, they always approach the dominant caste. The dominant caste provides food to the dalit people, when they come to the home. The dalit women often share their problems with the dominant caste women and seek solution. Thus there is a mutually supporting life in villages, inspire of untouchability. Let me ask, how many people in rich posh areas, know the people of the nearby slum. Or how many rich people help the slum people in needy times? Let’s take the case of gang wars in colleges. Students belonging to one group won’t interact with the other. It’s the norm in many colleges. It’s natural because, when there are differences, people chose to live away.