 |
| "Triumph of Bacchus" (1628) by Diego Velasquez |
According to Soni, the representatives from the embassy thought that since the workers were "semiskilled" and "uneducated," they might be lying (157).
Why might people tend to trust highly educated people more than they trust people who are not highly educated?
Answer this question after you've read part three, chapter nine and all the preceding chapters.
Classism and elitism are evidenced in many educated circles. The tendency of the "haves" to suspect the "have-nots" of immorality is not new in any respect (the regard of the Roman Optimates for the urban poor comes to mind). Highly educated people (such as diplomats, lawyers, and government workers) recognize their own class of people and, in keeping with human nature, are more likely to associate with, and therefore respect, them. Those with higher education, especially in a country like India which possesses a high degree of economic inequality, tend (though not to generalize) to be a little wealthier and tend to belong to a higher strata of society. Therefore, it is easier for the more educated to assume that there is a degree of understanding amongst themselves and, branching from this, that there is a (relatively) commonly-held moral code among them, even if this is by no means the reality.
ReplyDeleteAs a result, the migrant workers of this narrative are looked down upon and thought to be lying. Because they do not belong to the "class" of society's successful, the Indian embassy representatives find it harder to sympathize with them and find it easier to assume that they are telling lies or are exaggerating. Even though the materially successful and highly educated do not have a monopoly on morality or trustworthiness, there may exist among those of higher means an understanding and solidarity that does not exist between the representatives and the workers who they should be serving, not accusing. Due to the fact that Soni's band of workers are "semiskilled," it is also easier for the diplomats to peddle a politically expedient narrative that they are not being truthful. Given that their chief job, as Soni has described elsewhere, has been to ease US-Indian relations, it is in their interest, beyond just assuming misconduct on the part of the workers, to victim-blame them in fulfillment of their perceived role.
They are highly educated, so they know more in depth about a subject than someone else. Let's take the flat earth conspiracy. A person could say they are uneducated and have never taken science class. They don't know the truth because they never learned the truth. They could be misled like if a toddler were taught 2+2=5 or something else that's incorrect. Whereas a person who is highly educated is probably stating the truth which they have researched or learned.
ReplyDeletePeople tend to trust higher-educated people because they think they are smarter and more trustworthy since they have a better education. It is as if due to them having a higher education they are automatically better than the people that do not. I do not understand this concept at all, especially being the first in my family to pursue a higher education. I would never trust or think of my family any less for not having higher education, they all excel in the fields they are in. Therefore, when Soni heard that the representatives thought the workers may be lying due to them being "semiskilled" and "uneducated," I was shocked. How could embassy workers write off people as liars just because they do not have a higher education such as themselves? If that is the case, then is every person who does not have a higher education a liar? It is unfair to judge people based on their educational background. A lot of people do not have the same access to higher education as we do, that does not mean they are any less of trustworthy people.
ReplyDelete-Abigayle Shropshire
In my opinion, treating or trusting individuals more or less because of their education is not fair. If there had to be a reason, I would say that because one might seem to have a high education and more skills, then they look more appealing and hard working. They might be perceived as a higher class because they seem to know more than most. If one does not have an education, then to the naked eye they might be perceived as lazy, or inactive looking for jobs. Making them seen as untrustworthy and maybe unproductive.
ReplyDelete