Review: The Pedagogy of The Oppressed oleh P. Freire

1. Preliminary

In his book "The Pedagogy of the Oppressed," Paulo Freire said that peace implies a state of satisfaction. But, it is very difficult to be satisfied when denied basics such as food, clothing, shelter, education, medical care, and hope.

Not surprisingly, therefore, there is a little peace in a world characterized by painful differences between the rich and poor, between the haves and the have-nots. Poverty and social oppression may not lead directly to war, but they certainly are not conductive to peace. Dependencia theorists point out, for example, that Indonesia, Brazil, and Sudan are rich ; only their people are poor. Thus the "dependencia" theory---based on the Spanish word for "dependency"---was born.

Poverty is fundamental to the appeal long exerted by communism. One of the most stimulating (and radical) approaches to the issue of poverty is found in the work of revolutionary Brazilian educator and social theorist Paulo Freire, who has long been concerned with those who are oppressed. 

Freire explores how to break down the walls between the oppressed and their oppressors, between theory and practice, between teacher and those taught---achieving true "dialogue," with the goal of moving toward a more egalitarian society. And in this session, the writer will deliver Paulo Freire's brilliant idea from his "The Pedagogy of the Oppressed" book.

2. Content

The problem of humanization has always, from an axiological point of view, been humankind's central problem. It now takes on the character of an inescapable concern that leads to the recognition of dehumanization. Dehumanization, which marks not only those whose humanity has been stolen, but also (though in a different way) those who have stolen it, is a distortion of the vocation of becoming more fully human. This distortion occurs within history, but it is not a historical vocation. 

Because it is a distortion of being more fully human, sooner or later, being less human leads the oppressed to struggle against those who made them so. This, then, is the great humanistic and historical task of the oppressed : to liberate themselves and their oppressors as well. The oppressors, who oppress, exploit, and rape by virtue, can't find in this power of strength to liberate either the oppressed or themselves. 

But, almost always, during the initial stage of struggle, the oppressed, tend to become oppressors, or "sub-oppressors." The very structure of their thoughts has been conditioned by the contradictions of the concrete, existential situation by which they were shaped. Like, this is their model of humanity. 

This phenomenon derives from the fact that the oppressed at a certain moment adopt an attitude of "adhesion" to the oppressor. The "fear of freedom" which afflicts the oppressed, a fear which may equally well lead them to desire the role of oppressor or bind them to the role of oppressed, should be examined with one of the basic elements of the relationship which is called prescription that every prescription represents the imposition of one individual choice upon another, transforming the consciousness. Freedom must acquired by the conquest, not by the gift and it must be pursued constantly and responsibly.

On the other hand, Education is a must-do-things for everyone in this world. And there is a method that being called as "banking" concept which the students are the depositories and the teacher is the depositor. Instead of communicating, teacher tend to make the students patiently receive, memorize and repeat. In the banking concept of the education, knowledge is a gift bestowed by those who consider themselves knowledgeable upon those whom know nothing. The students alienated like the slave in the Hegelian dialectic, accept their ignorance as justifying the teacher's existence---but, unlike the slave, they never discover that they educate the teacher.

The raison d'etre of libertarian education said that education must begin with the solution of teacher-student contradiction which benefits both parties. Dialogue is also a must-do-things in this world including in education. Teacher and students being both communicator and listener, there's no barrier with this kind of education that provides dialogue. 

But, on the other hand, dialogue can not exist without humility. Dialogue is broken if the parties(or one of them) lack humility. Men and women who lack humility(or have lost it) cannot come to the people, cannot be their partners in naming the world. Someone who cannot acknowledge himself to be as mortal as everyone else still have a long way to go before he can reach the point of encounter. Dialogue further requires an intense faith in humankind, faith to make and remake, to create and re-create, faith to be more fully human (which is not the privilege of an elite, but the birthright of all). Faith is an a priori requirement for dialogue. 

Without this faith in people, dialogue is a farce which is inevitably degenerates into paternalistic manipulation. Founding itself upon love, humility and faith makes dialogue become a horizontal relationship of which mutual trust between the dialoguers is the logical consequence. Trust and hope also a requirement of the dialogue, dialogue cannot exist if the party's words do not coincide with their actions and it's labeled as a lie. However, dialogue also need hope ; a feeling of expectation and desire for a certain thing to happen. 

It's useless when the parties have the love, humility, faith and trust but no hope on them. The dehumanization resulting from an unjust order is not a cause for despair, but for hope, leading to the incessant pursuit of the humanity denied by injustice. Hope, however, doesn't consist in crossing one's arms and waiting. As long as I fight, I am moved by hope; and if I fight with hope, then I can wait.

3. Conclusion

In this book, Paulo Freire is trying to tell people about how oppression can affect people's lives. Even in education, using the banking concept, which is not accepted communication for both parties (teacher and student), the students tend to accept everything that the teacher gives without other discussion. The oppressed ones tend to grow by thinking that they should be the oppressors, and it will be a never-ending story. That is why, in this book, he said that dialogue can be a good bridge for people. 

For Freire, oppression, whatever the reason is, is not a part of humanity. People have the right to free themselves, not be trapped inside of their shell. And I agree with the concept of this book that (might) help people from oppression. This book is a true story that happened in Brazil, and this book isn't being taken for granted. If I can make an example ; it would be the Indonesian style of education that still lacks dialogue, but they often take the banking concept that the teacher is the most knowledgeable person and the students are not. And it's actually not good for our future. Teachers shouldn't be the ones who give students everything that they know. 

A teacher is not a God who knows everything, and students is not that stupid. They might have some questions besides the lesson that is being taught in school. The relationship between teacher and students must have a dialogue that helps both parties to get better because being human is not the most knowledgeable thing. 

Even a professor itself sometimes makes mistakes. The conclusion that I got after reading the book is, Freire wants this world to be free from oppression, even in education. Because everyone in this world will never want to be the oppressed one. Let's slowly change the world to make it a better place, starts with communicating with people in a kind way. And don't forget to love yourself because it's a must. Love yourself, trust yourself, have faith.