Reflecting on Pablo Friere's Pedagogy of the Oppressed.

Chapter 1: a review, looking at the Oppressed and Oppressor mentalities in society

The beginning of Paulo Friere’s seminal work introduces us to a ideas relevant to contemporary revolutionaries and leftists. The starting premise of this chapter is that contemporary society (Paulo is talking about his work in Brazil or Chile, although this could apply to any industrialised capitalist society) is profoundly dehumanising. It prevents people from reaching their true potential, having confidence in themselves and finding meaningful relationships because they find themselves paralysed within a rigid social hierarchy, either in their position as oppressed or as oppressors. Oppressors are distrustful and fearful of the oppressed and need to preserve their power and the oppressed often aspire to the position of oppressors or feel that they really are lazy, unworthy and incapable of leadership. There is even the sense that relationships within the oppressed class are limiting and superficial, as they focus on gregariousness over a true sense of solidarity and class consciousness. Yet, Friere is not pessimistic, as he takes the existentialist view that human beings are formed from the society and ideas which surround them, but the social-historical order is also the result of the actions of human beings- so society can change. This presents a challenge as the oppressed class have only known a society which denies them agency and autonomy, so the task of revolution requires that they have a liberation through education and personal reflection. However, the oppressor class will not allow the education system within a state to pursue liberating, revolutionary education, so this will always be extremely difficult to achieve.

Friere’s thesis is a radical one and emphasises that the oppressor class are responsible for setting the standard of a ‘necrophilic’ society. This means that all that is animate, lively and human within the world are increasingly viewed as intimate things. For the oppressor ‘to be is to have’, and the accumulation of objects of labour, earth and even other people is seen as a quest for actualisation within society. There is no point at which the oppressor will recognise that they have enough to meet their needs, or that their accumulation is leaving too little for the oppressed class who make up the majority of society, accumulation is seen as an absolute and inalieable right. While the oppressed may lack even the basic elements of a healthy, full life, any restriction on the leisure, finances or luxury of the oppressor class is viewed as a threat to 'individual liberty’. The oppressor class is extremely hypocritical in that while revolution is seen as violent and a threat to their individual liberty, they have little concern for the violence of oppression, that so any people go hungry and have their options limited by the class structure. They also have state violence on their side, which would be viewed as legitimate in its efforts to crush the revolution. The oppressor class are also responsible for the generation of myths about the oppressed that underwrite the exploitative nature of society; that the oppressed are lazy and unintelligent, and may even be able to convince groups within the oppressed class to turn on each other because of this, even to the point of committing violence against each other. Communication between the social classes is reflective of the same rigid hierarchy, with the aim of managing the masses, it does not enter into dialogue with the oppressed and reinforces a passive social role.

This can even be true of converts to the revolutionary cause from the oppressor class, who maintain an entitlement to instruct and lead the working classes, but are afraid of the consequences of any true dialogue and distrust them— this revolutionary movement will be oppressive. While some oppressors may feel guilty about the plight of the oppressed, this tends to be resolved by paternalistic ‘humanitarianism’, which doesn’t challenge the hierarchal nature of society or empower the oppressed class to believe in their own abilities and find their own solution in commune. It is dehumanising rather than truly humanistic.

For Friere any truly revolutionary movement is marked by two main dynamics; dialogue and mutual decision-making over blind sloganeering and activism to change society through change at the level of individual consciousness. This is what Freire means by ‘praxis’, true, critical reflection and dialogue will lead to actions, but you cannot skip this step. A revolutionary needs to trust the working class, even while acknowledging that their initial state of mind is marred with oppression. Freire believes ultimately that people can and do change and that hopeful message should have capitalism quaking in its boutique leather brogues.

This chapter is fascinating and reflects back the world that we know. Right at this minute in the UK, the Conservative party's plan for their Universal Credit benefit roll-out proposes a new round of mandatory workfare for young people, ages eighteen to twenty-one who are out of work. This involves giving free labour to large companies who can grass that claimants are turning up late to the Department of Work and Pensions to have this young person’s benefit income withheld. This is just the sharp, coercive end of a much wider co-option of education within society, from being a tool for helping to illuminate the world and create critical, well rounded citizens to the idea that work is the only aim and end result of education, the only possible societal contribution an individual or institution can make. We even have advice columnists telling young people to steer clear of studying social science and philosophy degrees for more lucrative qualification. Individual and collective interests are tied to financial renumeration in a way that is enormously problematic. Young people and poor people need to synthesise their psyche and values to the purposes and aims of profit driven corporate Britain to succeed and for society to prosper. Writing and thinking and teaching and learning, beyond the confides of a corporate office or business course, make you the dead weight in necrophilic Britain.

It is also helpful in making sense of the current culture wars, between a supposedly native white working class and champagne, middle class socialists like me, supporting immigrants who ‘take their jobs’ and 'destroy their culture’. This is an ugly and unpleasant topic, rife with racial wolf-whistles, accusations of classism and elitism and people turning into Stormtroopers before your weary, maybe hallucinating eyes. Support for the working class and a true solidarity doesn’t need to indulge racist rhetoric whipped up by many British daily newspapers. It recognises that the bigotry, anger and resentment we hear from a disadvantaged member of the white working class is really 'the oppressor within’ and a result of that individual being dehumanised rather than trusted and engaged with. Has the person, standing in front of you, saying that 'Trump will save America' or the 'elites are against UKIP'. really had the opportunity to engage with critical education, which treats them with respect and tries to allow them to pursue a true humanisation? probably not. There is hope yet for a better way in Brexit Britain yet.