Adult Learning and Discourse

Freire has been criticized for romanticizing revolution. What’s up with his claim that only the oppressed can liberate the oppressors…huh?  I was frightened by his liberation pedagogy, and the awesome responsibility of “stirring up” marginalized individuals to action.  On closer look, his ideas seem to flow from love, not anger: The oppressed must reflect on their own dualities, and liberate themselves from YPOOPY based on the oppressor. (Kenji Yoshino  calls this “covering”). To become authentic, a marginalized individual must identify the ways she has been domesticated into believing in her own “fatalistic” helplessness and worthlessness. To “name” this interiorized oppression, she needs to critically reflect on the ideologies that underpin policies, establish ”hidden” curricula. And, of course, discover the potency of her own voice, within an emancipatory, self-directed dialogue with her peers.

So Freire’s revolution is not based on anger, but on love and respect for the the right to be one’s self.  (Thus, this bottom-up revolution, which liberates the oppressors from their self-imprisoned right-to possess, and replaces it with a higher value– the right to be. ) Freire famously noted: to humanize the oppressed is subversive. I saw this first hand in prison work, where the hidden curriculum was designed to silence prisoners like Anne Blanchard. And if you were an “inmate lover” you were pretty much shunned, or worse.

But is all this too much of a stretch for us to apply to our own worlds? Are our own programs “neutral?” Do they make uncritical assumptions about a level playing field that create microaggressions (or other discriminations) against certain groups or individuals because of the way they look or pray or dress?  Freire claims that all eduators are either emancipatory or domesticating. We  either help our learners validate themselves (”be” themselves) or we move them toward assimilation into the dominant culture (covering). Do you agree? Can teachers be neutral? Is dialogue a relevant method (pedagogy) for all forms of adult education, or is this simply irrlevant to some settings? That’s the problem I pose to you, dear reader, but also to myself. Should this class even be a part of ADLT 601, or is it too exotic for this course?   (PS, I learned much from the conversation this evening. Thank you.)   B.