Andrea,
 

> You asked me what marxism is, and I replied.  Did I

> say that Freire 

> followed the tenets that I described as Marxist? No

> I did not say that.<<


You said Freire succumbed to Marxism and then
proceeded to define it in terms that brought up image
of what Marxism was to you. By virtue of that you
implied that is what you felt Freire fell for. 


> There was a lot of discussion about marxism  after

> the USSR broke up.  

> I remember one guy on a radio talk show saying

> something like this:  

> "But marxism has never been tried!"  (Others were

> calling the USSR a 

> marxist-leninist state.)  He was right,   So what

> are we to do with the 

>   contradiction?  I  listed the elements  of marxism

> as it has been 

> called, and as it has generally been agreed upon in

> talk, newspapers, 

> etc.<<


That does not relate to the discussion right now.
Let's stick to what you said Marxism was and implied
that that was what Freire fell victim to.
 

> "Socialism" has an allied problem of definitional

> incoherence. <<

In your interpretation I take it?


>>The 

> media often misapply the term "socialism" to mean a

> top down 

> government.   It's a scare word.<<


Not where I come from. Sounds suspiciously like
capitalism to me.


> I have not, except in one point, denied the

> usefulness of Freire's 

> content.  I think Freire's linguistic  devices are

> unfortunate.<<


As are Kant's, Hegel's, Piaget's, and we could go
on...
 

> And I must ask, why aren't you writing examples of

> Freire's work, 

> translated into your own idiom, in this

discussion?<<

For me it is because I am amazed that one needs
examples. I work in a domain where I see this popular
education/community development happen. All one has to
do is search the net and search the NGO world. When I
see communities in Andhra Pradesh ravaged by HIV/AIDS
organising, and working with NGOS and government
agencies to make changes in their environment for
themselves, that is an excellent example of Freire in
action. When 5-year olds are taught to resolve
conflicts and articulate their demands, I see the
seeds of power being sown. In SIDH when the
organisation is in seamless praxis with communities,
well.. I could go on. Listen, look beyond yourself and
your world and you will find...


> If you think that  

> we need to be talking about Freire's content, why

> don't you do this 

> yourself?  That  would be useful, I think. and  lots

> better than 

> criticizing me for things I didn't say.  It would be

> good for readers 

> of this list serv to  have concrete  examples at

> hand for demystifying 

> Freire.  I would like that immensely. I crave plain

> talk.<<


So, what you are saying that it is plain talk as
defined by you... Plain talk or talk of any kind
varies within the context. My personal example is
having to learn how to address an American audience
and write papers for American professors and accept
that one can get 100% on qualitative exams. How about
expanding the definition of plain talk? 

I have found that there are as many expressions of
Freire as there are programmes. Does not mean I agree
with all of them. I find it hard to see Freire in
action in present day America, yet I am told it
exists. Not in the Adult Literacy Centres I observed.
It was very top down. Definitely not in GED classes,
or even in ESOL classes. My personal research on
learner voice was a real eye opener in terms of the
very existence of learner voice. My interviews with
learners (in more than one American state) showed that
every learner had more than one voice, and not all of
these were shared with the authorities.

I think Andrea, this is turning into an exercise that
could well be semantic hair-splitting. Andres and
David have explained very well what their take on
Freire is. 

Cheers
Ujwala

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com