|
, Christian socialism, liberation theology
|
| Direction: |
|
|---|
| Period: |
|
|---|
| Main interests: |
|
|---|
| Significant ideas: |
Pedagogy of the oppressed, “banking” education system, critical consciousness, anti-repressive education, practice
|
|---|
| Influenced: |
|
|---|
| Influenced by: |
|
|---|
| Awards: |
|
|---|
Biography
Born into a middle-class family in Recife (Pernambuco), Freire experienced hunger and poverty during the economic crisis of the 1930s, when difficult economic conditions prevented him from receiving a full education. In 1931 the family moved to Jaboatan dos Guararapes.
In 1943, Freire entered the University of Recife. Although he studied to become a lawyer, he devoted much of his time to the study of philosophy (especially phenomenology) and the psychology of language. After graduation, he decided not to work in his specialty, but became a teacher of Portuguese in a high school. In 1944, he married Elsa Maya Costa de Oliveira, with whom he worked at school and raised five children.
In 1946, Freire was appointed director of the Department of Education and Culture of the Social Service of the State of Pernambuco.
In 1961, Freire was appointed director of the Department of Cultural Development at the University of Recife. In 1962, he got the opportunity to put his theory into practice and taught 300 sugar plantation workers to read and write in 45 days. After this, the Brazilian government approves the creation of thousands of similar cultural circles throughout the country.
In 1964, after a right-wing military coup, the dictatorship banned their activities. Freire, a Christian socialist who sympathized with the Cuban Revolution and leftist movements in the country, was arrested and jailed as a “traitor” for 70 days. After exile and a short stay in Bolivia, Freire worked for 5 years in Chile for the government and FAO at the UN. In 1967, Freire published his first book, Education as the Practice of Freedom. Education as the Practice of Freedom
). Which is followed by his most famous book, “Pedagogy of the Oppressed” (port. Pedagogia do Oprimido, English Pedagogy of the Oppressed), first published in Portugal in 1968. In 1970, the book was translated into Spanish and English. In Brazil itself, the book was published only in 1974, in the context of the weakening of the authoritarian regime.
After spending a year in Cambridge, Massachusetts, where he taught at Harvard, Freire moved to Geneva, Switzerland, where he was special adviser to the World Council of Churches on educational issues. In addition, he advised leftist movements that came to power in the former Portuguese colonies (including Mozambique and Guinea-Bissau) on the creation of educational systems and the fight against illiteracy.
Freire was able to return to his homeland only in 1980. Freire joined the Workers' Party and was responsible for the party's adult literacy program in São Paulo from 1980 to 1986. When the PT won the 1988 municipal elections, Freire was appointed secretary of education for the state of São Paulo.
Creation
Paulo Freire worked in the field of public education and studied the philosophy of education, which allowed him to combine not only the classical approaches of Plato, but also modern Marxist criticism and the theory of the fight against colonialism. Pedagogy of the Oppressed can be seen as a development or response to Frantz Fanon's book Branded with a Curse (fr. Les Damnes de la Terre), which emphasizes the need to provide the indigenous population with an education that is both modern (instead of traditional, patriarchal) and anti-colonial (and not just the imposition of the culture of the colonialists).
Essays
see also
Write a review of the article "Freire, Paulo"
Links
- , Brazil
- , Malta
- , Finland
- , Arizona
- , Tel Aviv
Excerpt characterizing Freire, Paulo
“Yes, yes, do it,” he responded to various proposals. “Yes, yes, go, my dear, and have a look,” he addressed first one or the other of those close to him; or: “No, no, we’d better wait,” he said. He listened to the reports brought to him, gave orders when his subordinates required it; but, listening to the reports, he seemed not to be interested in the meaning of the words of what was said to him, but something else in the expressions of the faces, in the tone of speech of those reporting, interested him. From long-term military experience, he knew and with his senile mind understood that it is impossible for one person to lead hundreds of thousands of people fighting death, and he knew that the fate of the battle is not decided by the orders of the commander-in-chief, not by the place where the troops are stationed, not by the number of guns and killed people, and that elusive force called the spirit of the army, and he watched over this force and led it, as far as it was in his power.
The general expression on Kutuzov’s face was one of concentrated, calm attention and tension, which barely overcame the fatigue of his weak and old body.
At eleven o'clock in the morning they brought him the news that the flushes occupied by the French were again repulsed, but that Prince Bagration was wounded. Kutuzov gasped and shook his head.
“Go to Prince Pyotr Ivanovich and find out in detail what and how,” he said to one of the adjutants and then turned to the Prince of Wirtemberg, who stood behind him:
“Would it please Your Highness to take command of the first army?”
Soon after the prince's departure, so soon that he could not yet get to Semenovsky, the prince's adjutant returned from him and reported to his Serene Highness that the prince was asking for troops.
Kutuzov winced and sent Dokhturov an order to take command of the first army, and asked the prince, whom he said he could not do without at these important moments, to return to his place. When the news of Murat’s capture was brought and the staff congratulated Kutuzov, he smiled.
“Wait, gentlemen,” he said. “The battle has been won, and there is nothing unusual in the capture of Murat.” But it's better to wait and rejoice. “However, he sent an adjutant to travel through the troops with this news.
When Shcherbinin rode up from the left flank with a report about the French occupation of flushes and Semenovsky, Kutuzov, guessing from the sounds of the battlefield and from Shcherbinin’s face that the news was bad, stood up, as if stretching his legs, and, taking Shcherbinin by the arm, took him aside .
“Go, my dear,” he said to Ermolov, “see if anything can be done.”
Kutuzov was in Gorki, in the center of the position of the Russian army. The attack directed by Napoleon on our left flank was repulsed several times. In the center the French did not move further than Borodin. From the left flank, Uvarov's cavalry forced the French to flee.
In the third hour the French attacks stopped. On all the faces who came from the battlefield, and on those who stood around him, Kutuzov read an expression of tension that had reached the highest degree. Kutuzov was pleased with the success of the day beyond expectations. But the old man’s physical strength left him. Several times his head dropped low, as if falling, and he dozed off. He was served dinner.
The outhouse adjutant Wolzogen, the same one who, driving past Prince Andrei, said that the war must be im Raum verlegon [transferred into space (German)], and whom Bagration hated so much, drove up to Kutuzov during lunch. Wolzogen arrived from Barclay with a report on the progress of affairs on the left flank. The prudent Barclay de Tolly, seeing the crowds of wounded running away and the upset backsides of the army, having weighed all the circumstances of the case, decided that the battle was lost, and with this news he sent his favorite to the commander-in-chief.
Kutuzov chewed the fried chicken with difficulty and looked at Wolzogen with narrowed, cheerful eyes.
Wolzogen, casually stretching his legs, with a half-contemptuous smile on his lips, approached Kutuzov, lightly touching the visor with his hand.
Wolzogen treated His Serene Highness with some affected carelessness, intended to show that he, as a highly educated military man, was allowing the Russians to make an idol out of this old, useless man, and he himself knew with whom he was dealing. “Der alte Herr (as the Germans called Kutuzov in their circle) macht sich ganz bequem, [The old gentleman settled down calmly (German)] - thought Wolzogen and, looking sternly at the plates standing in front of Kutuzov, began to report to the old gentleman the state of affairs on the left flank as Barclay ordered him and as he himself saw and understood it.
- All points of our position are in the hands of the enemy and there is nothing to recapture, because there are no troops; “They are running, and there is no way to stop them,” he reported.
Kutuzov, stopping to chew, stared at Wolzogen in surprise, as if not understanding what was being said to him. Wolzogen, noticing the excitement of des alten Herrn, [the old gentleman (German)] said with a smile:
– I did not consider myself entitled to hide from your lordship what I saw... The troops are in complete disorder...
- Have you seen? Did you see?.. – Kutuzov shouted, frowning, quickly getting up and advancing on Wolzogen. “How do you... how dare you!..”, he shouted, making threatening gestures with shaking hands and choking. - How dare you, dear sir, say this to me? You don't know anything. Tell General Barclay from me that his information is incorrect and that the real course of the battle is known to me, the commander-in-chief, better than to him.
Wolzogen wanted to object, but Kutuzov interrupted him.
- The enemy is repulsed on the left and defeated on the right flank. If you have not seen well, dear sir, then do not allow yourself to say what you do not know. Please go to General Barclay and convey to him the next day my absolute intention to attack the enemy,” Kutuzov said sternly. Everyone was silent, and all that could be heard was the heavy breathing of the out of breath old general. “They were repulsed everywhere, for which I thank God and our brave army.” The enemy is defeated, and tomorrow we will drive him out of the sacred Russian land,” said Kutuzov, crossing himself; and suddenly sobbed from the tears that came. Wolzogen, shrugging his shoulders and pursing his lips, silently walked away to the side, wondering uber diese Eingenommenheit des alten Herrn. [at this tyranny of the old gentleman. (German) ]
“Yes, here he is, my hero,” Kutuzov said to the plump, handsome, black-haired general, who was entering the mound at that time. It was Raevsky, who spent the whole day at the main point of the Borodino field. One of the most influential teachers of the 20th century. became the Brazilian Paolo Freire. His main moral point was to protect the oppressed masses. As a very young man, he realized that in Brazil, as well as in other third world countries, tens of millions of people eke out a half-starved existence, they constitute the silent majority and, due to their illiteracy, are not able to understand their own social position and, therefore, protect themselves. According to the main tenet of Freire's theory, education is a condition for the emancipation of the broad masses of people.
It should be noted that in his reflections Freire sought to take into account the achievements of many philosophical movements, quite eclectically combining their characteristic features. Freire's main principles were most organically combined with the existentialism of K. Jaspers and the historical materialism of K. Marx. From existentialism he adopted the conviction of the relevance of the value of freedom. Existentialists believed that man is responsible for his freedom, which constitutes the quintessence of his existence. Freire deviated from this line: a person is not initially free, he needs literacy. Moreover, he is not alone in his aspiration, but is part of a certain social class. But K. Marx examined class collisions more thoroughly than others. And Freire decisively turned to Marxism, believing that oppression certainly calls for revolution, he took an active radical position. That is why he is considered the most prominent representative of radical pedagogy.
Freire's exceptionally selfless socio-political activity was assessed differently by the authorities. In some cases it was welcomed as consistent with the struggle for national independence, but often condemned as directed against the national bourgeoisie. After the military coup in Brazil in 1964, Freire was expelled from the country. It was during his 14-year exile that he published his major works, Education as the Practice of Freedom (1968) and Pedagogy of the Oppressed (1970).
The first book discusses the problems of industrialization, urbanization and literacy, which, according to Freire, had to be solved democratically. In the second book, he took a more radical position, bringing to the fore strategic goals: conscientization, revolution, dialogue and cooperation imposed on the authorities by the masses.
The concept of conscientization was coined by Freire. This means that scientific truths are not simply communicated to the broad masses of people, but they serve as a means of forming their self-awareness. The thesis about revolution also did not appear by chance. Freire was aware that revolutionary extremes are often accompanied by voluntaristic, unjustified actions. But he also understood that the authorities were not in the mood for a real dialogue with ordinary people, and therefore he had to force them to it, not allowing them to eradicate the revolutionary spirit.
So far we have considered the strategic goals of Freire's educational theory. But a teacher can be called outstanding only if he has a special didactic method. In this regard, Freire was not particularly productive, however, his theory is not without a strong didactic component. He contrasted the “banking” didactic concept with a problem-solving theory of learning. Within the framework of the “banking” concept, knowledge is communicated to the student as true, beyond doubt, not connected with his consciousness and understanding; it is stored like money in a bank. The teacher, by dominating the student, essentially suppresses him. Within the framework of the problem-solving concept, the teacher enters into a dialogue with the student, discusses problems, and forms a unity of opposites with him. The connections between them become not vertical, but horizontal. Dialogue and self-government are put at the forefront. Curricula are compiled jointly by the teacher and the student.
Freire demonstrated the possibilities of problem-solving didactic theory using the example of teaching illiterate adults to read and write. His successful attempt to teach reading and writing to 300 sugar plantation workers in 45 days received wide public attention.
Briefly stated, his method was as follows. First, the universal vocabulary of that group of people who are learning the basics of literacy is determined. Secondly, these words are written on special posters, and the objects they represent are indicated. As a result, a visual image of the word is formed. Third, the meaning of the chosen words for this group of people is discussed. Fourthly, the word is divided into syllables that vary (for example, ba-, be-, bi-, etc.). Fifthly, new words are formed. Sixth, their implications are discussed. Thus, words are not excluded, but, on the contrary, are included in the socio-cultural context.
Let's move on to the critical remarks. Claims were expressed against Freire by both Catholic socialists, on the one hand, and Marxists, on the other. Each party was jealous of its rivals. It has also been argued that Freire's pedagogy is only applicable to adults. However, it is known that children successfully repeat the actions of adults, and sometimes are more successful in performing them. It has been repeatedly suggested that Freire's theory can only be applied in developing countries. Freire strongly objected to this reproach, arguing that developed countries were afraid to admit their similarities with developing countries.
In essence, Freire became the leader of radical pedagogy, winning the support of many supporters. Not all of them, following him, were ready to defend socialist ideas. Another point of view was more popular, according to which widespread instrumental and conservative methods of education preserve the existing state of affairs; they are not oriented towards the future. This, for example, was the position of the American educator Henry Giroux (1943)
Paulo Freire(port. Paulo Freire, September 19, 1921, Recife, Brazil - May 2, 1997, Sao Paulo, Brazil) - Brazilian educational psychologist, pedagogical theorist.
Biography
Born into a middle-class family in Recife (Pernambuco), Freire experienced hunger and poverty during the economic crisis of the 1930s, when difficult economic conditions prevented him from receiving a full education. In 1931, the family moved to Jaboatan dos Guararapes.
In 1943, Freire entered the University of Recife. Although he studied to become a lawyer, he devoted much of his time to the study of philosophy (especially phenomenology) and the psychology of language. After graduation, he decided not to work in his specialty, but became a teacher of Portuguese in a high school. In 1944, he married Elsa Maya Costa de Oliveira, with whom he worked at school and raised five children.
In 1946, Freire was appointed director of the Department of Education and Culture of the Social Service of the State of Pernambuco.
In 1961, Freire was appointed director of the Department of Cultural Development at the University of Recife. In 1962, he got the opportunity to put his theory into practice and taught 300 sugar plantation workers to read and write in 45 days. After this, the Brazilian government approves the creation of thousands of similar cultural circles throughout the country.
In 1964, after a right-wing military coup, the dictatorship banned their activities. Freire, a Christian socialist who sympathized with the Cuban Revolution and leftist movements in the country, was arrested and jailed as a “traitor” for 70 days. After exile and a short stay in Bolivia, Freire worked for 5 years in Chile for the government and FAO at the UN. In 1967, Freire published his first book, Education as the Practice of Freedom. Followed by his most famous book, Pedagogia do Oprimido, first published in Portugal in 1968. In 1970, the book was translated into Spanish and English. In Brazil itself, the book was published only in 1974, in the context of the weakening of the authoritarian regime.
After spending a year in Cambridge, Massachusetts, where he taught at Harvard, Freire moved to Geneva, Switzerland, where he was special adviser to the World Council of Churches on educational issues. In addition, he advised leftist movements that came to power in the former Portuguese colonies (including Mozambique and Guinea-Bissau) on the creation of educational systems and the fight against illiteracy.
Freire was able to return to his homeland only in 1980. Freire joined the Workers' Party and was responsible for the party's adult literacy program in São Paulo from 1980 to 1986. When the PT won the 1988 municipal elections, Freire was appointed secretary of education for the state of São Paulo.
Creation
Paulo Freire worked in the field of public education and studied the philosophy of education, which allowed him to combine not only the classical approaches of Plato, but also modern Marxist criticism and the theory of the fight against colonialism. "Pedagogy of the Oppressed" can be seen as a development or response to Frantz Fanon's book "Les Damns de la Terre", which emphasizes the need to provide indigenous populations with an education that is both modern (instead of traditional, patriarchal) and anti-colonial (and not just propagating the culture of the colonialists).
Essays
- Paulo Freire. "Education as a practice of liberation." (Fragment in PDF format)
PEDAGOGY OF THE OPPRESSED
(50th Anniversary Edition)
Translation from English by Irina Nikitina (preface, introduction, chapters 3 and 4, notes to all sections, afterword, interviews with modern scientists), Maria Maltseva-Samoilovich (chapters 1 and 2, edited by Irina Nikitina). Unless otherwise indicated, translations of quotes in all chapters are by Irina Nikitina.
© Paulo Freire, 1970, 1993
© Donaldo Macedo, foreword, 2018
© Ira Shor, afterword, 2018
© Nikitina I. V., Maltseva-Samoilovich M. I., translation into Russian, 2017
© Edition in Russian, design. LLC "Publishing Group "Azbuka-Atticus", 2018
CoLibri®
* * *
Freire's book... calls on all educators in general and critical educators in particular to move beyond the fetishization of methods that paralyzes teacher thinking, innovation, and creativity.
Noam Chomsky, linguist, essayist, philosopher
“Pedagogy of the Oppressed” has the main criterion of a classic: this book has outlived its time and its creator. It is a must-read for every teacher who cares about the connection between education and social change.
Stanley Aronovich, Professor of Sociology and Cultural Studies, City University of New York
Without a doubt, Freire's work has generated an impressive response around the world. He is perhaps the most influential scholar in the field of education.
Ramon Flecha, Professor of Sociology, University of Barcelona
Freire's theory continues to challenge scholars today to consider the variety of personal and geographical nuances that need to be taken into account when thinking about education. Freire encourages us to look at everything critically, especially working together with others in the context of community when trying to solve pressing problems of inequality. It also situates research in the realm of everyday life - everyday realities, real destinies, the real conditions of people's lives, their struggles and their aspirations - in order to make research accessible to the people with whom we work and with whom / about whom we write these same studies.
Valerie Kinlock, Dean, School of Education, University of Pittsburgh
Dedicated to the oppressed and all those who suffer and fight alongside them
Preface to the edition dedicated to the fiftieth anniversary of the first publication
Before New York had time to show the world a $1,000 bagel, a local restaurateur included a $27,000 chocolate sundae on the menu, setting a Guinness record for the most expensive dessert in the world.
It is my great honor to write the foreword to Paulo Freire's Pedagogy of the Oppressed, a book that is undoubtedly already a classic as it has gradually gained in popularity over the past half century as the world enters the bleak 21st century. Leading intellectuals - Noam Chomsky, Zygmunt Bauman, Henry Geroux, Arundhati Roy, Amy Goodman, Tom Piketty and others - have repeatedly appealed to the prudence of the inhabitants of our planet, warning of dire consequences (which include climate change denial, shameless economic inequality, the threat nuclear holocaust) hegemony of the far-right political forces, which, if not checked by the left, could lead to the complete extinction of humanity as we know it. Therefore, it is necessary not only to choose a different political path, but also to take into account that it must be based on the development of a critical awareness of people of the fact that they exist in the world and interact with it - it is this position that Freire insisted on and it is this that permeates his brilliant, insightful thoughts expressed in “Pedagogy of the Oppressed.” In other words, Pedagogy of the Oppressed was written primarily not to propose a new methodology (which would contradict the author's critique of stereotypical models of education), but to stimulate the development of a emancipatory educational process that challenges students, calls them to action and demands, that through literacy and critical thinking they learn to change the world in which they live, thoughtfully and critically assessing it; so that they can identify and confront the divisions and contradictions inherent in the relationship between oppressors and oppressed. Thus, Freire wrote Pedagogy of the Oppressed primarily with the goal of awakening in the oppressed the knowledge, creativity and enduring capacity for critical thinking that is necessary to expose, demythologize and understand the power relations that have placed them in a marginalized position, and through this awareness to begin the work of liberation through praxis, which invariably requires constant, ongoing critical reflection and action. Although more and more educators now agree with Freire's thoughts, many of them, including those who adhere to liberal and progressive views, do not pay attention to the fact that their political discourse is inconsistent: on the one hand, they condemn the conditions oppression, and on the other hand, adapt to the dominant structures that directly created this situation of oppression. We will return to this issue a little later.
Freire always remained true to his view of history as probability and fervently hoped for the possibility of creating a world where there would be less discrimination and more justice, less dehumanization and more humanity, but nevertheless he was always critical of “liberation propaganda ... [which can only] “instill” faith in freedom into the heads of the oppressed, thereby seeking to win their trust.” Accordingly, Freire believed that "the correct approach is built on dialogue... [a process that awakens] the conviction of the oppressed that they must fight for their freedom, [which is] not a gift given to them by a revolutionary leader, but the result of their own conscientization ". During this long and fruitful walk, Freire told me, partly jokingly, that “the ruling class will never send us on holiday to Copacabana. If we want to go to Copacabana, we will have to fight for it.” During this long - and last - conversation, Freire several times showed frustration, sometimes bordering on “sheer rage,” as he used to call it, towards some of the progressive renegades who are adapting to neoliberal theology. Among them was his friend, former Brazilian President Fernando Henrique, who, like Freire, was exiled to Chile by a brutal neo-Nazi military dictatorship whose representatives killed and tortured thousands of Brazilians. In essence, Brazil's experiments with neoliberalism under the auspices of Fernando Henrique's government have exacerbated already dire conditions and plunged millions of Brazilians into hunger, poverty and despair, which in turn has led to worsening economic and educational inequality, while simultaneously unleashing systemic corruption in the country. ruling circles. Unfortunately, the socialist governments of the Western world of that time largely abandoned the cause of social justice, equality and equity, leaning towards a neoliberal, market-obsessed ideology that not only crushed the hopes of people who dreamed of a better world, but also overthrew those same governments , creating conditions for blatant corruption. This is exactly what happened in Portugal, Spain and Greece. In Greece, the Socialist Party under Prime Minister Georgios Papandreou allowed corruption to reach epidemic proportions, so that, for example, the PASOK party was able to buy votes by offering free air tickets to Greek citizens leaving the US and wanting to fly to Greece if they voted for the socialists. Such moves are reminiscent of strategies regularly criticized by Western democrats as attempts to rig elections, which they say are afflicting countries pejoratively referred to as "Third World banana republics" like a plague. It can be said that socialist governments on various continents have lost power, in particular due to outrageous corruption scandals, which in general gave rise to the emergence of center-right and far-right governments (Greece, where the radical left-wing party SYRIZA won the elections, was an exception). These governments were brought to power by the votes of disaffected and disenfranchised voters—voters who were victims of the austerity regime imposed on them by neoliberal policies.
Freire also made no secret of his “absolute rage,” condemning the critical stance of many soft-spoken liberals and some of the so-called critical educators who often find refuge within the walls of higher education institutions, hiding their dependence on shameless consumerism while attacking the market in their written discourse. theology of neoliberalism. Very often, the tastes of such soft liberals and so-called critical educators and their ways of being in and interacting with the world remain, in Freire's words, inextricably linked to the extreme neoliberal market views that they themselves condemn at the level of written discourse. In their daily actions, such soft liberals and so-called critical educators often act in a way that is not at all what praxis dictates, turning the stated political project into a fossil, into vague analytical rants that cannot go beyond the framework of “deferred” action - action planned with the goal of transforming the existing, destructive deification of the market inherent in neoliberalism into new democratic structures that will lead to equality, equity and the formation of truly democratic political practices. In other words, many soft-spoken liberals and so-called critical educators boast of their leftist principles, ostentatiously proclaiming themselves to be supporters of Marxism (which in most cases is expressed only in written discourse or in the safe walls of higher education institutions), and sometimes feel the need to also boast that For example, their radicalism goes beyond the ideas of Marx, since their political principles are closer to the views of Mao - a position they consider even more radical. As a result, being a leftist in academia becomes an appropriative, exotic political and cultural currency: being an ivory-tower Marxist gives one status, but in reality it is just a stylish brand, a personification of consumerism maintained through the manipulation of empty , a symbolic list of names and labels that are otherwise essentially meaningless. In essence, the academic title of “Marxist,” as used by some critical educators, turns ethical and political activism into a spectacle and the leftist worldview into a consumer commodity. Becoming a commodity, these self-appointed “radical” positions and the title of radical turn out to be dummies, losing their progressive content to such an extent that they become divorced from principled action. This gap underlies the reproduction of the theology of neoliberalism, which discourages collective social action based on critical thinking and encourages a zealous, cut-throat competitive spirit. This insidious process of decoupling critical discourse from action makes it possible to act contrary to belief: it allows self-proclaimed Marxists in the service of educational institutions to, for example, declare that they are against racism, while at the same time turning the fight against racial prejudice into lifeless clichés that leave no pedagogical space to critique white supremacist ideology. In this process, their progressive principles are often used, put into action only insofar as they expose racism at the level of written critical discourse, invariably reaping the benefits of privilege from the cemented, institutionalized racism that they voluntarily refuse to acknowledge and voluntarily refuse to fight against.
Thus, these Marxists in the service of the education system also ignore the political and systemic influence of racism, which was clearly on display during the 2016 US presidential campaign and which became increasingly horrific with each calculated speech of Donald Trump aimed at inciting hatred. by whites against their fellow citizens, not against the state or the conditions created largely by the neoliberal policies that enraged working-class whites, paradoxically, are willing to tolerate. Trump's election essentially exposed the lie behind the post-election campaign slogan that "racism is over" - a slogan coined after the election of Barack Obama, the first black president. Moreover, to deny the existence of racism while simultaneously expanding ghettos, normalizing the school-to-prison pipeline that operates primarily for blacks and Latinos, and exacerbating poverty as a side effect of racism, is to be racist. These self-proclaimed supporters of Marx and Mao in the service of the educational system are racist when they preach anti-racist sermons, presenting racism as an abstract idea and resisting the intellectual and social pressure that requires them to turn this abstract idea expressed at the level of written critical discourse into action, which would lead to a radical democratization of society and its institutions. How radically democratic are, say, universities if the majority of the faculty is white, apart from a handful of black professors and a tiny number of non-white students? For example, does racial bias play a role in the near absence of African Americans in classics departments—both among faculty and students—or are African Americans not genetically predisposed to study the classics and are therefore reluctant to enroll in such departments? Even more pernicious is the situation when such self-proclaimed leftists in the service of the education system join a social structure of denial of ingrained racism, which is expressed in their speech and behavior. Take, for example, the statement of a liberal white professor at a major city university, an institution that prides itself on its ethnic and cultural diversity: “We just want these black kids to learn how to learn.” Such remarks demonstrate not only the highly ethnocentric view of the act of knowing, as Freire insightfully discusses in Pedagogy of the Oppressed, but also that some of the people making such remarks are still shackled by the white supremacist ideology that has implanted myths in their consciousness and the belief that children of a particular race or culture are innately incapable of learning until they receive the prescriptions provided by educators to the poor and oppressed. The latter often carry pre-packaged lesson plans in their leather bags and Gucci briefcases in which they intend to teach, say, African Americans something that they could not yet know by definition, because until now they did not have the ability to acquire knowledge. The very existence of the brutal conditions in which these non-white children were doomed to grow up testifies to how well they learn, because they managed to survive in circumstances of “inhuman inequality,” as Jonathan Kozol caustically called it in some of his books. Would the sons and daughters of these Marxist university teachers be able to bear the pressure of such deep-rooted social inequalities and remain unscathed, while at the same time performing excellently in the final qualifying examinations? Probably not. Therefore, the mere survival of the most blatant racism, segregation, gender and class discrimination indicates not only the high level of intelligence of those children who are forced into the ghetto, but also confirms Howard Gardner's theory of the existence of multiple intelligences, which comes out beyond the Western concept of “intelligence.”
