logicp_writings/collectivist_theology/PauloFreire_RemakeMan.md

Paulo Freire - Learning to Remake man

The Politics of Education - broke him out into the North American education scene (magnum opus was Pedagogy of the Oppressed, which hadn't had the same impact by this time). This book got a favourable review in Harvard Educatoon review and had been Championed by Henri Giroux, who was Paulo Freire's chief evangelist. Set the stage so it would be taken up by hundreds of marxist educators.

Successful branch of the long march through the institutiosn whereby the Mraxists could infiltrate the key cultural pillars, like education, to lead into everywhere else.

Social Workers

Attempt to send them to re-education criminals instead of police Role of Social Worker is to raise a Critical Consciousness in those they intervene with.

• Trauma informed education
• Social Emotional Learning - justfiied on the back of Trauma-informed education or care
• Trauma-Informed Care: Started in 2001 to deal with an issue in medicine/psychiatry where people who were traumatiezd needed special treatments - instead of hitting psychological triggers have a rape or something like that.
• Mushroomed into something that was not like it used to be: taken up by activists and educator-activists - shift in education into a from in which Trauma-informed care fits perfectly.
• Logical model of Freire: education is for awakening a consciousness to a just and equitable world - Freierean Model
• Pop-psychology: basd on scientology - revaluation counseling -> plagiarizezd ersion of scientology written in theterms f pop psychology. Henry Jakins ? Devotee was Herbert Marcuse's 3rd wife - totally into his nonsense (marcuse's)
• This is the milieu in which all this trauama-informed nonsense cama einto being -> social workers who took up the Freirean charge in this work.

Becomes Religious

• Becomes less about education and becomes more religious
• Chapter 8 - The Process of Political Literacy
• Education is the process by which to achieve political literacy (its new purpose, in fact)
• Demonstrates that the theological/ontological model of Marx is actually being used in this way because that is the accurate interpretation of it (distinct from post-modern and neomarxist)
• point of education for Freire is a political education - which is to say, a Marxist education
• Education should teach political literacy
• Not easy to make sense of the role of this
• Political Theory -> Marxist theory. Only one vaild way to understand politics because Marx believed he had found th one truly scientific of history. All others suffer from ideology - captured by the dominant modes of thought, created by the bourgeiousie to maintain their power.
• Marxism arrives from a gnostic consciousness/scientific concsiousness that was "crucial" for understanding how to seize the means of production of society and man in the world around you to go forward to a Utopian vision.
• Freire's Utopian character of education
• Wissenschaftlicher Socializmus - everything else is a mytholgoy that the ruling class tells itself to keep itself in power and everyone else down
• Marxism is the only legitimate poliitical theory so educating in political literacy is really only educating in Marxism
• Ideologies are mythologies that the Bourgeiosie write for themselves, tell themselves, convince those of the underclass of etc. Just stories to justify dominance
• Justify dominance OF THE SYSTEM in which they happened to be dominant -> this removes agency

Scientific Study

• Real material conditions that Marx alone had discovered
• Politics is "downstream" from economics and society/man/everything is downstrea mfrom economics and material conditions

Hegel

• Marx appropriated Hegel with 2-tiered lizenschaft
• Hegel: verstand (science) underneath vernunft (higher level reason)
• Hegel created the idea that we have to understand the world but we have to be able to contextualize those facts and see, in a sense, the wholistic picture and pieces within context of the whole
• Vernunft: Hegel's speculatize Idealism
• Hegel's Dichotomy is what Marx used to create WissenschaftLicher Socializmus - scientific socialism
• We still have to study the world, but the study has to conform to mrxist theory which is the true reaso - everything else is contaminated by ideology and vested interests
• people don't know what they are participating in because what they defend is a mythological representation fo whot hings work which they call the "system", but that system happens to benefit them
• Scientific Socialism wherein you assert Dialectical Materialism to change the material cnditions in a dialectical process
• The one true understanding of Society - all other political theories defend a system

Che

• The true avatar of what is left wing. Everything else is Right wing
• You must continue to be a revolutionary
• Right wing is everything bureaucratic, sclerotic, necrophiliac
• Constant, perpetual revolution (you can't know the end)
• If you know the end that you have in mind, then you become right wing

Dialectical Evolution

• Hegelian thought - dialectical faith of leftism
• Hegel's idealism wasn't good enough for Marx, who transformed it into Dialectical Leftism
• Hegel had right/left branches (his followers)
• Hegel created Scientific Gnosticism: Gnostic cults (serpent in the Garden of Eden, whispering in language assumed to be Science), but Vernunft is the gnostic high-level understanding
• Marx takes the dialectic and turns it from idealist to materialism - Rejects speculative idealism -> politics no longer running downstream from ideal, but from Material Conditions
• Freire takes this and says "no, they run downstream from Cultural conditions"
• Only scientific of politics follows from this dialectical interpretion: Marxist dialectical materialism is the only true scientific study, and educating for Political Literacy (educate for Marxism)
• Marxified version of education to push Marxist theory

Culturally-Relevant Education

• We are now using Identity-based cultural theory of education to push Culturally-based Identify Marxist Theory. Race Marxist theory of education pushing CRT. Same exact model (Glorida Ladson Billings) - borderline plagiarism (Freirean object put into a Race box).
• The real point of social & education: Awaken the Marxist
• Generative Words/Concepts: Codification/Problematization/Decodification (Chapter 6)
• For Freire and Billings, the point of education is to awaken Critical Consciousness
• Induce cultural competence: political literacy (Identity Politics - you are politically Black instead of just Racially Black)
• All at the expense of genuine literacy and mastery (why learn disconnected sentences and syllables when we can use the class to teach political literacy)

Generative Concepts

• The vocabulary word choices should be things that help to bring about liberation.
• No longer talking about teaching people to do things, because academic mastery would be used for the "banking model" of education, where the child is seen as an empty vessel where knowledge can be put so they can choose to capitalize or not.
• Learning allows you to capitalize in a knowledge-based economy
• Switch this to the Marxification of education in order to bring literacy (Codification/Problemitization/Decodification - repackaging of Hegel)
• Kant: Thesis - Anthithesis - Synthesis (encapsulates broader whole and stands up to greater scrutiny)
• Hegel: Birth of Scientific Gnosticism - Make it about Negative thinking. Abstract, then negate, and you arrive at the concrete understanding
• Freirean Dialectic from Hegel: Codify the make the abstract. Problematize to negate it (say why it's problematic) and do politics. Then De-codify to make it concrete for your particular understanding
• Hegel's Scientific Gnosticism is still cult nonsense and it doesn't work, an will eventually lead to catastrophes
• Marx made it so much worse by mkin it wholly material and fundamentally evil (putting man)

Grooming

• Education turned into Cult Grooming
• There is sexual grooming, and grooming into sexuality-based concepts (Hannah Dyer - point of early childhood grooming into Queer theory is to ensure childrens' identities stay fluid - don't stabilize)
• Despite the ratio of
• Catholic church grooming is continuously presented as being a secret scandal, but it's a scandal that everyone and their dog knows about and has joked about
• Cult grooming (Marxist) occurs using the Freirean techniques (into Identity Marxism)
• Simple methodology (trichotomy):
  • Induce vulnerability (initiation)
  • Offer resolution through cult doctrine (indoctrination)
  • Cut people off from outside sources (programming)

Freire's Prophetic Vision

• In practice, identify vulnerable kids: give them surveys. Ask them if they engage in suicidal ideation.
• Ask them how the changes in their body make them feel
• Ask them if they sometimes with they feel like a boy or a girl
• Identify who is vulnerable/stressed
• Shuttle them into programs in curriculum or after-school clubs
• Make them vulnerable about identity
• Employ cult doctrine while love-bombing them
• Be attentive to their trauma
• "Here's the reason why everything is bad, here's what you can do about it"
• Cycle of commitment ensues
• Parents don't understand, they are a difficult culture
• Literal cult grooming posing as education
• Freire talks about his goal of a prophetic vision for education; begins with prelude to his original essay. New book is a preliminary prelude

"When I began to write this chapter, I looked upon this theme as a challenge. Indeed, seeing this as a challenge forces me to respond critically rather than anively. My critical attitude in itself presupposes a deep and intimate understanding of the theme in the sense of unveiling it more and more. This essay, then, answers the challenge by becoming yet another challenge for its readers. My critical attitude towards this theme leads me to an act of knowledge and this requries not only knowing objects but only a knowing subject, like me." *Frames this whole thing as a challenge he has had and an even bigger challenge for you. This challenge is answered by another bigger challenge. Who is a knowing subject? He is! Himself.

• Freire describes everything as a process
• In Marxism, everything is incomplete (man, society, world)
• Hegel put forward a Hermetic and gnostic religion in mould of Christianity
• Remember that with this manner of thinking, nothing ever "Is". Everything is always becoming.

Heremetic Belief

Hermeticism is Alchemy of a particular type (parallel to Gnosticism)

• Hegel put forward a Gnostic AND Hermetic religion, modelled after Christianity.
• Synthesized things for his speculative philosophy
• The absolute (God/Deity/Infinite) cannot know itself as divine without something mundane to compare itself to.
• Creates the World to know what it is
• Alchemical processes analogous to Dialectical processes
• Metaphor of Alchemy: picture the Fire as the Dialectic (transmute things in the alembic)
• Seeds of Gold of Trapped within the Mundane
• Free and blossom through the process of becoming perfect
• The state gives rise to the practical form of the idea
• Cultural alchemy and leads to revolution with a new idea, so the Theoretical Idea can advance (which in turn updates the Practice. Praxis until absolution)
• The Deity realizes itself it is Deity - the Deity that doesn't realize itself as deity
• Thinking agents of the world do the thinking and synthesizing - Concretizing
• Dialectical Faith of Leftism

Freirean Revolution

• Remake education so that children become perpetual change agents
• Stopping revolution stops progress of history
• Constant change is the necessity
• Frustrated Neo-Marxists can't abide
• Constant destabilization until absolution

"Since it always a process, knowing presumes a Dialectical situation. Not strictly an I think, but a We Think." We think, therefore we are. "It is not the I think that constitutes the We Think, but rather the We Think that makes it possible for Me to Think. We think, therefore I think, therefore I am. We think, that makes it possible for me to think." I can only think because collectively we are thinking

This is why mathematics is being transformed to stop focusing on individual achievement, and instead focus on collective achievement. It is not the I think that matters, but the We think. It is not the I think that constitutes the We Think. The process of knowing is a dialectical situation. The individual and collective are opposites that need to be dialectically synhtesized into Individuals made to live in a Society (Socialist Man).

Marx says the goal is to become socialist man that lives in social society so that they become co-continuous.

Russeau said Savages made to live in Cities (original Master Slave Dialectic) inspiring Hegel.

Marcuse wants outsiders that are insiders. The margin made to be at the center. Individuals meant to live in society. Individuals who have subordinated themselves to the collective and through a Dialectical process you are made free. You are choosing to become part of the collective because of your interjected morals and values. Become a collectivist who believes themselves to be more free because the Collective does things for you, you don't have to do things you don't want to do. Entitlement complex.

"In epistemological terms, the object of knowledge isn't a term of knowledge for the knowing subject, but a mediation of knowledge." The object of knowledge is the thing that you study, know, or want to know. It is not a term of knowledge for the conscious, it is a mediator/tool for learning. Math isn't math on its own, but a tool for learning something else. So it can be retooled to be the tool which teaches that which we must know - how to liberate ourselves

If you want to get religious, your sermon has a lesson. It's not even a sermon about God, but a Politics lesson dressed up as a sermon. Your mom is political.

Different Human Knowledges

So the process of coming to know things isn't really one where the thing that you're learning matters. The thing you are learning is a mediator or vehicle of actual knowledge, which is political knowledge - Freirean education will hijack every other subject to deliver political literacy lessons. Your child becomes a tool for proliferation of Marxism.

Example

1. Spoke with mother in Idaho. Boy was required in math class to write a "mathography" -> autoethnography about his experiences in Mathematics (Diary entry posing as scholarship - generizable social conclusions from your experience). Instead of learning Algebra, you write about your history of mathematics to find out how you felt and how you now feel about mathematics. Politics lesson dressed as math through vehicle of Social Emotional Learning.
2. Crackpot feminist goes on date to find a wonder woman doll at a toy store and freaks out (this is proof of misogyny because it's still easy to buy male action figures).

Reading

"Like any active study, reading is not just a passtime, but a serious task, in which readers attempt to clarify the opaque dimensions of their study. To read is to rewrite, not memorize, the ocntents of what is being read. We need to dispense with the naive idea of consuming what we read, like Sartre, we might call this artificial notion the nutritionist concept of knowledge, according to which those who read and study become fat intellectuals. This might justify such expressions as "hungry for knowledge", "thirst for knowledge", and to have or not have an "appetite" for understanding."

Reading has to be a serious task in which you rewrite what you're reading -> codification, problematization, decodification. The dumb smart person who repeats things is an annoying and worth of criticism, but being a Marxist isn't the distinction which makes you smart.

"This same artificial concept currently informs educational practice, in which knowledge is na act of transference. Educators are the possessors of knowledge, whereas learners are empty vessels to be filled by the educators deposits (switched frmo nutrition to bank analogy). Hence, learners don't have to ask questions or offer any challenge since their position cannot be anything other than to receive passively the knowledge their educators deposit. If knowledge were static and consciousness empty, merely occupying a a space in the body, this kind of educational practice would be valid, but this is not the case. Knowledge is not someting that is made and fininshed, and consciousness is an intention towards the world."

Two meanings here: knowledge is not something that is made and finished (no kidding), but what's being implied here. What he's saying is something that sound sperfectly reasonable, but Marxists think knowledge is contingent and relative. Knowledge and truth is a matter of a social formation.

France in the 18th century and America in the 20th century have completely different knowledges. And it's not geographical - there is knowledge today, tomorrow, the next day, and none of these are the same, because for Marxists the knowlege is knowledge of how to turn the revolution one more turn. How to be Critically Conscious in the present circumstances, so that when you have your revolution and come to a new set of circumstances, you need more Critical Consciousness to have another revolution to come to the next set of circumstances. Before, now and later have different knwoledges, because knowledge is a matter of truth, and truth is a matter of a social formation.

"Knowledge must be relative, as Goerthe said, because everything withers away". And so the dialectic progresses. Knowledge is not something made and finished, and you think he's talking about the fact that we're still learning, but what it means is directly insofar that it enables revolution.

Consciousness is an intention toward the world - to create a revolution. It's all to setup the dialogical model where the educator learns about oppression from the learner, who doesn't have empty consciousness, and then grooms that learner into Marxist consciousness (the intention toward the world) - to transform the world (disrupt and dismantle - build back better!).

Human is the conscious subject who knows he is the conscious subject taht can envision what he wants to create in the world and thus by creating the thing he puts some of himself in the world and then sees himself in the world. He brought his humanness into that thing (a tree into a picnic table - humanized wood / useful to humans / value to humans by envisioning what the human process is). You see yourself and humanize yourself.

Remember the difference between animalizing and humanizing - you can't animalize the world because they don't have a subjective capacity. Humans are different - we need to exist to prove we are not animals through the Marxist ontology of Man. We are human because we envision as a concept subject who humanizes the world, make it fit for humans and then see ourselves and understand that we ar the kind of animal that can change the world, rather than adapting to the world. We adapt the world to ourselves, and not just the object as the world, but man is his own object. Society is his object as well. Other men are man's object, and we do this with ourselves and each other. We humanize ourselves, society and the world.

Still Speculative Gnosticism

"In humanistic terms, knowledge involves a constant unity between action and reflection upon reality. Like our presence in the world, our consciousness transforms knowledge, acting on and thinking about what enables us to reach the stage of reflection."

A truly Marxist theory of knowledge itself. Knowledge is a special bourgeois property if you think that it's static. If the things that we know about the world are things that we'll still know later (men are men and women are women). Knowledge is a special bourgeois property that has to be made a matter of a social formation. Math and reading are not about learning or learning reading - they are transformed into vehicles for political literacy -> Marxism

"This is precisely why we mjust take our presence in the owrld as the focus of our Critical Analysis. By returning to our previous experiences, we grasp the knowledge of those experiences."

Shifting from knowledge to lived experience. Epistemology to other ways of knowing. Ways of knowing are transformed knowledge. Activist Ideology posing as knowledge fills the gap. The grasped knowledge is data-mined in the Dialogical model and used for generative concepts, and then used in the codification/decodification process.

"The more we can uncover reasons to explain why we are as we are, the more we can also grasp the reason behind our reality and thus overcome our naive understanding".

Everything not Freirean or Marxist is naive. They alone are conscious and know the direction that history must take and how knowledge must change in order to achieve the History they hope to achieve

Back to Truth

Truth definition in Marxists encyclopedia - different types of theories of knowledge:

• Rationalists believe knowledge is located in reason
• Empiricists believe knowledge is located in experiment
• Pragmatists believe it's a matter of practical outcome
• Marxists most like Pragmatists, but where Theory and Practice are wedded together. What makes Marxism work in the present context.

All Truth is relative because everything withers away.

"Even as I wrote, no matter how often readers read what I am writing now, we together must employ a Critical Analysis. That is, we must use our experience, or taht of other subjects in the field, as the focus of ou rreflection, as we attempt to increase understanding. Then we can begin to understand the real meaning of our theme. The process of political literacy, where the noun literacy appears metaphorically, given the presence of this metaphor, let's review our analysis by briefly reviewing the process of adult literacy in terms of linguistics, which in itself is also political; a process upon which this metaphor is based.

Methodologically, this involves the creation of different practices in the field of adult literacy and pre-supposes different ways of perceiving illiterates. Two kinds of antagonistic practices that reflect those ways of perceiving illiterates are usually called domesticating and liberating."

Literacy is a metaphor now. We're not actually going to learn to read, we're going to learn politically literacy. There are just two options: everything is Domesticating, or Liberating. Marxification of Education, Generative Concepts, Dialogical Grooming Model, Codification/Problematization/Decodification Technique, Marxist False Dichotomy, Liberating Approach

False dichotomy of "Marxist" or "domesticating". Analogous to Queer Theory: "You can have a trans kid or a dead kid". Liberating or Domesticating.

There might not be a better example of the Iron Law of Woke Projection in print, which is also prescient because of its "liberatory education"

The Liberatory education model is the next step in the Equity/mArxist-Based education program.

The most egregious iron law of woke projection: "It's not important whether educators are conscious of following a domesticating practice, since the essential point is the manipulative dimensions between educators and learners, by which the latter are made passive objects of action by the former."

Doesn't matter if teacher knows they are brainwashing their students (they might think they're doing best practice). The essential point is that it's manipulative, because it's manipulating kids to become passive objects of education who are just going to learn whatever the society already produces. Reproduce the present.

Giving kids none of the critical thinking skills necessary for them to point out and figure out that they're under a Marxist frame which pretends to be liberating, but actually will be used to enslave them

"This demonstrates that there is no truly neutral education. An ingenuous consciousness, though, might interpret this statement by attributing a lack of neutrality"

What's the consequence of a leap of logic from the strawman of education to a manipulation that's pretending to make a point of there being no neutral education. Everyone is grooming! Grooming is good when we do it, but grooming is bad when you do it. Repressive grooming!

"Education of a liberating character is a process by which the educator invites learners to recognize and unveil reality Critically. The domestication practice tries to impart a false consciousness to learners, resulting in afacile adaptation to the reality whereas a liberating practice cannot be reduced on the part of the educator to impose freedom on learners."

"Although in a domesticating education there is a necessary dichotomy between those who manipulate and those who are manipulated, in an education for freedom there are no subjects who liberate or objects who are liberated, since there is no dichotomy between subject and object."

Necessary dichotomy as declared by they who engage in the iron law of woke projection..

"The domesticating process is, in itself, perscriptive. The liberating is dialogical. Education for domestication is an act of transfering knowledge, whereas education for freedom is an act of knowledge and a process of transforming action. This should be exercised on reality"

Freire has setup the scene so that everyapproach to education is manipulative grooming that domesticates learners, except his approach. The point of his approach is to make education on creating Marxists who will go out as change agents to transform the world and knowledge through their activism. The failures of education today can be summarized through this.

Iron Law of Woke Projection

Why do we have this phenomenon? It's a massive failure of imagination among a lot of Marxists, like Freire. They conceive of the world and everyone in the world in the way that they conceive of the world. They can't see outside of their own bias.

They look at education and see it as domesticating and grooming, and then they think "no, you guys are the ones who are grooming. That's how education already works and we're going to do something different". The Iron Law of Woke Projection arises because it's how they think about the world. They are confessing. Confession by projection.

"You as parents just want to groom kids into ***" - they say this because they think raising a child is an act of grooming. There is not the parent child relationship distinct from grooming. Thus, the model they produce is based on the way that they think. They think everything is a conspiracy theory because they are running a conspiracy. They think everyone colludes to keep them out, because if they had the power they would collude everyone to keep them out. They say that they privileged are entitled because they are entitled. We are dealing with someone who has a limited range of understading about how the world works, and so they project that into everyone's heads: "If I were the teacher, this is how I would act, therefore that's what teaching really is". They just have to play a language game around it to flip it over, make it inverted and upside down, because they know these approaches are bad form, so they say that others are doing it already, and that they are the one group who are not doing it.

Freire's method

"Since they're not marginal beings who need to be restored to health or saved, learners are viewed as members of the large family of the oppressed. Answers for their situation do not reside in their learning to read alienating stories, but in their making history that will actualize their lives."

We are not the ones trying to save your kids, you are, in a messianac effort. They break things and then claim to save you from the thing that they broke by taking control of your life and saying "well get the solution to you"

"If we now begin to consider the problem of political literacy, our point of depature might be an analysis of political iliteracy. From the linguistic point of view, if an iliterate is one who does not know how to read or write, a political iliterate, regardless of whether one knows how to read or write, is one who has an ingenuous perception of humanity in its relationship with the world. This person has a naive outlook on social reality which, for this one, is a given. Social reality is a fate accomplis rather than something that is still in the making."

You are a history maker who ahs to understand their role in changing history. You have the unique conscious perspective to guide history to its intended destination. A political iliterate is someone without that critical consciousness.

We have a crisis of education now because we have adopted a failure of an education model as the primary education model and educated all of our educators and administrators in this educational model. You have to pause and ask yourself how this was adopted in North American education - how did nobody say no? Marxist infiltration. A massive, pre-existing Marxist subversion in the discipline of education had already taken place (especially in the colleges of education).

"It is impossible for us to escape the real world without critically assuming our presence in it. If we are in the sciences, for instance, we might try to hide in what we regard as the neutrality of scientific pursuits. In different to how our findings are used. even in interested in considering for whom or for what interests we are working. When questioned about this, we respond vaguely that we work in the interest of humanity"

Science is political because we are indifferent as to how our findings might get used by people. Maybe we discover some form of propulsion and military people strt using it. So we intrinsically did a political thing, even if we are just focuing on the technology itself. What is the flip-side of this? What does scince education have to become under this liberating approach? You have to always think about how findings are used, and you have to be interested in considering for whom and for what interests might our results come out.

So if you get the results which might help someone whom you don't want to see helped, you have to squash those results. Science has to be remade to be political because it's already political and in trying to not be political we aren't paying attention to the politics that might follow from our science. Science must be politicized and made into political education.

"If we practice religion we might establish an unfeasible separation between humanity and transcendence. If we work in the social sciences we might treat our society, under study, as though we are not participants in it. In our celebrated impartiality we might approach this real world as though we are weearing gloves and masks in order to not contaminate or be contaminated by it".

So everything must be politicized such that it grooms people into Marxism or else it domesticates them, whether science, math, religion, etc. They must be retooled to be the other way around.

All that is done is the grooming phase which is done to decodify and make you believe that you're oppressed based on the way that everyone participates.

"Our concept of history can be mechanistic and fatalistic. History is what took place - not what's in the making or what will come. The present is something that should be normalized, whereas the future, as arepetition of the present, becomes the maintenance of the status quo. Sometimes the political iliterate perceives the future not as a repetition of the present but as something established - a fate accomplis. Most views are domesticated visions of the future. The first domesticates the present, which must be repeated, and the second reduces the future to something inexorable. Both negate people as beings of Praxis, and in so doing, they also reject history. They both suffer from a lack of hope"

So if you don't teach children to become change agents who make history and change their conditions, you are domesticating people. You are negating the fact of them being beings of Praxis. They can't change the world in any substantive way, like curing cancer, and they suffer from a lack of hope, all because they are not using their education and training as part of a Marxist path of achieving political literacy. History is the sum total of the human drama, including the future, and you are in a particular chapter and, as such, you are this chapter's author. If you don't know this, you are hopeless and ahve been groomed to be oppressed, but if you do the right things with the right solidarity then you can be a change agent to change the future.

You should learn that history is in the making, and that you are the author of the current chapter, thus you can be a change agent to create history

Becoming Conscious

"Let us now move from analyzing the process of literacy for domestication, to discussing generally a few ideas about what education should be doing from a Critical point of view. Education, by demystifying reality, can help educators and learners overcome political iliteracy. I will occasionally refer to points previously discussed. I trust that these reiterations, instead of irritating my readers, will help us better understand our common theme. I will begin by restating a basic point. If we don't transcend the idea of education as pure transference of a knowledge that merely describes reality, we will prevent critical consciousness from emerging and thus reinforce political illiteracy."

Pure transference of knowledge that merely describes reality is actually a good thing. We need to be able to learn the specific things we intend to learn, or else we become burdened with ambiguity and complexity. How can you conduct yourself to execute to your best capacity if your skills and knowledge are no longer able to be focused to create and express the very things they are designed for?

Political illiteracy is not being a Marxist, and we want to reinforce that. And if we want to prevent Critical Consciousness from emerging, what we have to do is to use education as a means of transfering knowledge that describes reality. Not bad!

If you don't want to be a Marxist, make education about describing reality.

"If our power of choice is really revolutionary, we have to transcend all kinds of education in order to achieve another. To know and to transform reality are reciprocal prerequisites. The essential point to highlight is transcending a domesticating educational practice for one that is liberating. I stress again that it is truly liberating Praxis for the educator to follow a domesticating model."

His way, or you're evil and naive.

"Although the educator in the domesticating model always remains the educator of learners, the educator for freedom has to die, so to speak, as the exclusive educator of learners, that is, as the one educating them. Conversely, the educator must propose to learners that they too die as the exclusive learners of educators, so they can be reborn as real learner-educators of the self-educator and the self-learner. Without this mutual death and rebirth, education for freedom is impossible."

You have to die to your ideological life and you have to kill your students in the ideological sense and be reborn as a Marxist. That's what Freirean education is.

Paraphrased: The educator of learners has to die as the exclusive educator of learners. Educator must propose to learners that they too die as exclusive learners of educators. Without mutual death and rebirth, education for freedom is impossible.

Everything is domesticating education unless you metaphorically die and are reborn as a Marxist and induce the same in your students.

"In such a view, at the very moment when she or he begins a process, the educator must be prepared to die as the exclusive educator of the learners. He or she cannot be an educator for freedom if he or she only substitutes the content of another educational practice for a bourgeois practice, and thus preserves the form of that practice. In essence, the educator has to live the profound meaning of Easter."

The educator has to live the profound meaning of Easter? You have to die to the world that think you know and be resurrected so that your flock can be saved.

"One of the great merits of the Chinese Cultural Revolution was its rejection of static, anti-dialectical or overly-conservative concepts of China's history. Here there seems to be a permanent mobilization of the people in the sense of creating and recreating society. In China to be conscious is not a slogan or ready-made idea. To be conscious is a radical way of being - a way characteristic of humanity."

Nevermind the fact that they created a one-China 5000 year history that's fake. Maybe he didn't know that Mao had published a little red book that was a book of slogans, and considered one of the most important pieces of literature in Communist China

Chinese Communist art we're all familiar with where they're all wearing these puffy suits. Man Woman Boy Girl we are all the same.

Conscientization

"One of the most important point in conscientization is to provoke recognition of the world, not as a given world, but as a world dynamically in the making"

We are back to Hegel's becoming world - the Dialectical Faith of Leftism is here.

"Conscientization always involves a constant clarification of what remains hidden in us while we move about in the world, though we are not necessarily regarding the world as the object of our critical reflection."

Look inward, like Robin d'Angelo. The profound meaning of Easter takes place inside YOU' "Conscientization cannot ignore the transforming action that produces this unveiling and concrete realization." Critical reflection about the real world to unveil a more real reality. A hyper-real reality, or a pseudo-reality

"I know very well that implied, in this critical reflection about the real world, is something made in an unveiling of yet another reality. And, again, I know very well, that to simply substitute an ingenuous perception of reality for a critical one, it is sufficient for the oppressed to liberate themselves. To do so, they need to organize in a revolutionary manner and to transform the real world in a revolutionary manner. The sense of organization requires a conscious action making clear what's unclera in a profound vision of consciousness. It is precisely this creation of a new reality, prefigured in the revolutionary criticism of the old one, that cannot exhaust the conscientization process; a process as permanent as any real revolution."

Why do we have a revolution through kids that are educated into revolutionary change agents? To create a new reality. Marx said Man's purpose is to humanize the world - society has to be humanized, the world has to be humanized, man himself has to be humanized. This is accomplished through work that you envision in your own subject mind, bringing it t be in the objective world and seeing yourself in it. You've humanized the world by making a human product, and humanized yourself by seeing you are not an animal, because you can make that human product. You do this to other people and yourself, and thus awaken them in consciousness - individuals made to live in societies.

*Anything that constrains the subjective range for Marx, including reality - the subjective range of our imagination. Anything which constrains that and anything that constrains your ability to transform reality according to what you can imagine. Anything which limits your subjective range in that regard is a limitation upon man that apparently must arise from ideology and social relations, which are what condition man, and therefore must be abolished and transformed. You have to make a new reality, itself.

Marcuse said it, Lukacz said it, Freire said it.

"As transforming beings, people may stay glued to the new reality that comes about from their action, btu they will be submerged in a new unclear vision. Conscientization, which occurs as a process at any given moment, should continue whenever and wherever the transformed reality assumes a new face."

This is why you have to die as a hopeless being and be reborn as a hopeful being. This is why you have to have a perversion of the faith, a perversion of the love of people, a body not in Jesus Christ but in Che Guevara. This is what Freirean education is about - Marxist programming into Freire's religion. This is why our education system is the way that it is, the reason the education system is a disaster. We have behavioural problems, kids who can't learn anything, are destablished and anxious, who are being put in ap osition to where they're going to be socially transitioned and then physically transitioned, separated from parents emotionally and socially, and later physically through social services, which is something that children can be groomed into learning how to do.

Tragic Story

Immigrant mother comes from Peru, her daughter Yaeli Galdamez, is groomed at school into believing that she's a boy. She's socially transitioned at school, she's taught to understand that her parents won't give her affirming care, that she has to hide it from her parents who won't agree, and so Child Protective Services are brought in by the social workers involved with the school and get Yaeli taken out of her home, so she can continue her transition because her parents won't do it, at 16 yeras old.

At 19, Yaeli walks in front of a train, because it doesn't work. This is all destruction posing as progress. Destruction as necessary progressivism. You can have a domesticated kid or a liberated kid. You can have a trans kid or a dead kid.

You end up with a destabilized kid.

Literally a matter of religion for Paulo Freire. You have to die and be reborn into it. That's what this is really about - the creation of a new reality, prefigured in the revolutionary criticism of the old reality.

A new reality which cannot exhaust the conscientization process, which is as permanent as any real revolution.