[Note: This posting is subject to further editing.]
Up to now, this blog has
been reviewing the elements of critical theory and one fact that comes through is
that that theory comes in a variety of flavors.
And as such, it is a challenge to convey to readers a singular version
of the view’s positions concerning educational curriculum and instruction. One way to convey what the view proffers is
to zero in on one of its respected theorists and review his contributions.
This blog looks to the work of the late Paulo Freire, a
Brazilian educator, who dedicated himself to work toward reforms in that South
American nation. He was a prolific writer,
but his most famous work was his book, Pedagogy of the Oppressed.[1] This account will rely on
this book to report on Freire’s contributions.
His account relies heavily on the factor many critical
writers highlight, that being the discourses people utilize. He describes how language is politized by oppressors
in a society, especially focusing on the work of educational decision
makers. They generally opt for a course
of language from an array of political constructs,[2]
but for those who think from a natural rights perspective – probably the most
liberally minded option available – they speak in terms of how open the
economic system is and affords people in general a multitude of opportunities.
Within
that system, natural rights view argues that anyone who works hard can achieve an
economically rewarding life. And if such
believers are educational decision makers, they use and promote a language that
ignores the systemic factors that keep the oppressed from advancing. That is the case, in part, when the oppressed
internalize that language and instead of directing their efforts to overturn
the system, they seek to be that rare case that “proves” the oppressors’
argument to be true.
In
short, Freire claims that the oppressed, due to the ubiquitous presence of such
language, internalize this view and believe the rationales that the oppressors advance. Breaking hold of that language is daunting
but not impossible and Freire offers several steps by which the oppressed,
after experiencing their own transformation, need to perform in order to lead a
general transformation process.
According
to Freire, the central aim of the educational system should be to initially debunk
this language. Their overall effort
needs to be directed at achieving authentic humanity. How?
By assisting the liberation of those who are oppressed and, further, for
them to actualize their freedom by leading this transformation through their action.
Naturally,
such action begins with recognition of what is taking place. Specifically, the oppressed need to become
cognizant of the dehumanizing messaging, with its images and beliefs, being
transmitted by the common language all seem to employ. Here is what Freire shares:
Only
as they discover themselves to be ‘hosts’ of the oppressor can they contribute
to the midwifery of their liberating pedagogy. As long as they [the oppressed]
live in the duality in which to be is
to be like, and to be like is to be like the
oppressor, this contribution is impossible.[3]
An early step, therefore,
for the oppressed is to conduct dialectic analysis. That is, they begin by objectively determining
what are the actual conditions that set up and maintain their dependence on the
oppressors. In addition, they conduct
effective actions that transform that reality.
At the same time, they need to challenge or confront those
perceptions they harbor that lead to their oppressed status. These insidious perceptions function to
distort their understanding of what prevails in their social spaces and allow
for those conditions that cause their suffering. They must overcome the inability to perceive
the objective truth. They, therefore,
need to engage in a dual process: changing
their consciousness and acting toward transforming their beliefs and values and
that of society in general. Summarily,
all of this action is called praxis.
Praxis is fundamental to what Freire calls upon the
oppressed to do. And before one judges
these activities as only benefiting the oppressed, Freire argues that it not
only seeks to gain the humanity of the oppressed but of that of the oppressor. They do this by stopping those actions that
undermine not only the humanity of the oppressed but also that of the
oppressor.
This aspect of Freire’s approach is quite ironic. While the oppressors seem to be enjoying
their liberty and “advantages,” they lose their humanity by oppressing the
disadvantaged. This state denies these
advantaged people to fully see their fellow humans as humans and instead to see
them as objectified creatures. This
undermines their human, empathetic nature as they see others as a set of
numbers and manipulative assets or liabilities.
In effect, they, the oppressed, take non-human characteristics – i.e., they
become dehumanized – in the eyes of the oppressors.
And then there are the advantaged elites’ efforts to fix this
– either of the bleeding-heart variety or of genuine concern. By instituting either charitable projects or
even governmental welfare programs, these attempts by and large are egoistic
endeavors sponsored by the oppressors.
They further the dehumanizing process by being cases of false generosity
spurred by a sense of paternalism. This
can also include “reform” educational programs and other “progressive”
endeavors.
Praxis not only benefits the oppressed, but all of society
as it seeks to attain permanent liberation.
It helps people achieve or arrive at truthfulness by cutting through the
veils of deceit. Freire writes,
Any
situation in which “A” objectively exploits “B” or hinders his and her pursuit
of self-affirmation as a responsible person is one of oppression. Such a
situation in itself constitutes violence, even when sweetened by false
generosity, because it interferes with the individual’s ontological and
historical vocation to be more fully human.[4]
This definitional statement pertains
not only to the oppressed but the oppressors as well and, as such, both are
victims of this exploitive arrangement.
And as one
can intuitively guess, changing the held images and beliefs – along with their
values – of the oppressors is more difficult to achieve when compared to
changing the perception of the oppressed.
That consciousness of the oppressor is noted for a strongly held
possessiveness of the world and of the men and women who inhabit that world.
The world, under this view, is the stage upon which people are
marketable objects.
That would be commodities to be bought and sold for profit. With this sort of image, one can imagine that
it is a short step toward sadism.
“…[T]he aim of sadism is to transform a man into a thing, something
animate into inanimate…”[5] Through the history of exploitation, this
dehumanizing imagery seems to be continuously observed or noted among those who
engage in such injustice.
And aren’t there any truly concerned and worried members of
the elite class that see the injustices before them and strive to reform or
transform this unjust system for purely charitable reasons? Yes, but they unfortunately carry with them
the biases of their class. They might
form vanguard groups that will lead the oppressed from their misfortunes, but in
truth, because they bring with them the upper-class baggage, they will not
fully or, in some cases, partially trust the oppressed.
Freire warns his readers that to effectively transform
existing oppressive systems, trust is essential. Past efforts, where trust is lacking and the
oppressor class has attempted to lead such efforts, the result has not been a transformation but an transferring
from one oppressive system to another.
This is what
happened in Russia with its revolution where power transferred from the Czar
regime to eventually Stalinism. Unless a
true commitment – a true comradeship – emerges, a genuine transformation cannot
take place. That sort of movement can
only be led by a transformed oppressed people with their mutual trust levels
and armed with their knowledge derived from their life experiences.
[1] Paulo Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed (New York, NY: Continuum Publishing
Company, 1999).
[2] This includes political constructs that justify
traditional, highly parochial views.
Often these reflect ideals and values that are somewhat feudalistic and
rationalize social/economic arrangements where one’s birth conditions are seen as
being the will of God. This is an
opinionated claim by this blogger and derived from various conversations with people
from developing countries. It turns out
that the data to determine how much a given underdeveloped country lacks social
mobility is lacking. But that a concern over
this deficiency exists can be noted by the various professional journal articles. They call for more attention to this
issue. See, for example, Linden Kemkaran
and Vegard Iversen, “Social Mobility in Developing Countries: Broken Ladders,” University of Greenwich/Natural
Resources Institute, accessed April 17, 2023, https://www.nri.org/latest/news/2020/social-mobility-in-developing-countries#:~:text=Social%20mobility%20refers%20to%20the,educational%20attainment%2C%20occupation%20or%20health.
[3] Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed, 30, emphasis in the original.
[4] Ibid., 37.
[5] Ibid. 41.
This quote attributed to Eric Fromm.
No comments:
Post a Comment