Comparing Marcuse, Freire and Gramsci - Essay Example

Task: Comparing Marcuse, Freire and Gramsci Question Gramsci’s problematic explains the ways in which political strategies are developed. He states that the developed strategies should be able to impact effective changes to the relationship of domination. The problematic further gives an analysis of the institutional power basis. It gives an explanation of how different institutions of power function (Borg, Buttigieg & Mayo 21). The knowledge given by Gramsci’s problematic is essential for the development of actual political strategies. From his problematic, Gramsci created the theory of politics. The theory expands on the significance of consciousness and culture in the development of institutions of power. Gramsci developed writings that give an analysis of both culture and political leadership. In the writings, he explains the ways in which states make use of cultural institutions in maintaining leadership in capitalist societies. According to his theory of politics, the downfall of the emancipator politics is caused by little understanding of the basis of power of the institution. The lack of adequate knowledge is majorly brought about by the relationship that existed between politics and the popular culture. According to the theory, the political education of a marginalized area determines the occurrence of changes in the political and social life of the region. In order to eliminate the domination relations, a new culture has to be created. The masses should also be transformed into being conscious of the political on-goings in the state. According to Gramsci’s theory of politics, in the modern state, the relations of domination are maintained and protected by the coercion and force (Borg, Buttigieg & Mayo 27). The relations are also maintained through the practices of consent and persuasion. This is where citizens of the state willingly accept and adhere to the priorities and values of their leaders. However, according to the theory, leaders must persuade other citizens of the state into accepting the system of beliefs, moral values and the intellectual presented they present. Gramsci also expanded on the concept of Hegemony. This term was, previously, used by Marxists like Ilyich Lenin. Gramsci became the leading Marxist thinker. The term was used to show how the working class participated in political leadership in a democratic revolution. The form of leadership denoted by hegemony was based on moral and intellectual leadership. The term is against the use of force by leaders. To demonstrate hegemony, Gramsci rejected economies. Instead, he insisted on the independence of ideology from economic determinism. He also showed rejection on crude materialism (Borg, Buttigieg & Mayo 71). He offered Marxism that was characterized by a humanist version which focused on human subjectivity. Gramsci used hegemony to reveal the way in which one social class dominates over others. The presented dominance existed in economic and political control. It also existed in the view about the world that was possessed by the dominant class whereby individuals who were subordinated by the ruling accepted it as natural. According to Gramsci, this type of leadership is maintained in the society by the creation of a cultural and political consensus. This is achieved through schools, families, religion and media. It assists in making the groups that are being ruled to abide to any rules that are passed. Gramsci describes a hegemonic class as a class that has articulated the interests of other social groups to its own. He further explains that this group achieves its mission by the use of ideological struggle. As an active force used by the dominant classes in shaping and incorporating the common sense views, interests and demands of the subordinate members, Gramsci puts focus on the role played by ideology. He further explains the ways in which hegemony works by the use of an approach referred to as social formation model. Freire’s problematic states that developing a method with the aim of creating critical awareness of an object leads to domination. This problematic is concerned conditions that originate from the legacy of the European colonialism. The problematic concentrates on countries in which racism was the major cause of domination (Dale & Hyslop-Margison 18). Freire’s problematic defines imperialism as a state of policy aimed at establishing and maintaining political control in all territories and citizens who reside outside the state. The problematic further reveals colonialism as a form of imperialism. In colonialism, individuals belonging to an annexed area and differ in race, ethnics and culture. In developing his problematic, Freire focused on the relationship that exists between the structures of culture, consciousness and colonialism. In his concept of education, Freire referred to all ways that an individual uses in order to know the world well. The concept also concentrated on social literacy (Dale & Hyslop-Margison 26). It is not restricted to a simple discussion of formal education. In his problematic, Marcuse developed a normative goal that is aimed at empowering people. He provided a critical review of the nature of oppression that hinders people from realizing empowerment (Abromeit & Cobb 42). Marcuse also explained the nature of oppression by focusing on revealing how individuals in domination get internalized in the identity formation process. It is this process that harbors the realization of the vision of normative of freedom, happiness and reason. Question 2 Marcuse developed a book about aesthetics. The book gives an account of the political implications of the modern art and its relationship with the society. Developing the book was his final task. His book also denotes the reason that caused him to split with Marxism when he rejected Marxist aesthetics (Abromeit & Cobb 45). Marcuse developed aesthetic dimension with respect to the writings he did previously on the critical theory. The previous writings also discussed the subject of art. According to Marcuse, art causes resistance to the repression of the society. His book about aesthetics also records that revolution of a culture must be connected to the social and political revolution of the state (Abromeit & Cobb 56). According to Marcuse, this possibility of the existence of a relationship is revealed through symbolism and artistic detachment (Abromeit & Cobb 57). However, in his book, he gives a less radical but a more inclusive suggestion of the modern source of power in art. Marcuse transformed the principle of performance into the aesthetic principle by explaining that the aesthetic principle is the major role played by imagination and fantasy. In his explanation of the aesthetic principle, Marcuse chose to discuss his point of view on the success of the high culture. He, later, translated his discussion in relevance to all areas of art. According to his views, the fulfillment of the promise of transcendence can only be achieved through gaining some independence from the rest of the society (Abromeit & Cobb 6). He further explains that independence is attained through the support of the media. According to Marcuse, for an artist to be successful, he must attain the truth about his work. The artist can obtain this reality by detaching results in a symbolic representation. A successful art usually invokes ultimate happiness that is represented by its beauty (Abromeit & Cobb 69). The symbol of the art of longing to fulfill awakens people from compliancy. In the introduction of his book, Marcuse asserts that according to him, literature is the original source of his influence for the aesthetic dimension. However, he thinks that the ideas can best apply to plastic arts and music (Abromeit & Cobb 73). In his philosophy of humanization, Freire ignores some essence of the condition of humans. He explains that human beings are temporal and conscious historical creations. These qualities do not exist in other animals (Dale & Hyslop-Margison 39). The most important point in Freire’s philosophy is that all human beings possess an ontological humanization vocation. He further gives an acknowledgement of the significance of education across race, gender and class lines. However, according to Freire’s assertion, the differences between human beings are caused by a number of unmentioned aspects (Dale & Hyslop-Margison 47). In his philosophy of humanization, Freire reveals the interaction of human beings with objective reality. They also interact with one another (Dale & Hyslop-Margison 92). He explains that by doing this, humans alter the interaction and modify themselves in return. Currently, human beings live in a social world. Therefore, any consideration of how the world should appear must be taken into account. However, little sense is created in discussing about Freirean ethics in reference to particular ideas or the ways in which individuals conduct themselves. The behavior of liberation, as exhibited in human beings, is a collective and dialogical process that shows the act of struggling (Dale & Hyslop-Margison 107). Freiren, in his philosophy of humanization further explains that the aspects of reality amongst human beings are on constant change. This idea reveals his dialectical approach that is directed towards understanding the universe. The idea summarizes Freires views in reference to the political theory. From the starting point to the end of the philosophy of humanization, Freire’s principle remains constant (Dale & Hyslop-Margison 128). The main idea in the philosophy is that the world is full of change, interaction and incompleteness despite the myriad material, personal and social sphere. Freire urges human beings to create a universe in which humanization takes the place occupied by dehumanization. He describes the new world as a world that provides necessary requirements for love to exist between individuals (Dale & Hyslop-Margison 207). He further states that human beings possess the ability to modify the world by being conscious of the capacity of love that exists between them. In his philosophy of humanization, Freire states that education is the key to bringing to an end all the problems facing human beings. Question 3 Mercuse’s performance principle contains the concept of a repressive reason that aims at taming instinctual drives for enjoyment and pleasure (Abromeit & Cobb 101). He describes the values of the principle as a governing tool of a society that is capitalized. The values include assertiveness, profitable productivity, competitiveness and efficiency. This implies that the performance principle is the rule of the functionality that is rational and discriminating against an individual’s emotions (Abromeit & Cobb 112). The functionality principle is a dual morality implying that it condemns and alienates inhuman labor and also displays the strength of human beings, the will to power and virility. Marcuse carried out a philosophical analysis on the philosophical interlude. The analysis revealed the presuppositions that exist in the Western rationality (Abromeit & Cobb 129). According to his analysis, Marcuse asserts that the reality principle leads to antagonism between object and subject in the Western civilization. It also leads to conflicts between an individual with the society and between passion and reasons. According to the performance principle, the raw materials in the ecosystem that have to be mastered are the ones that create the real experience of nature to human beings (Abromeit & Cobb 136). The raw materials are the objects of resistance, domination and provocation that ought to be overpowered. According to Marcuse, the Western civilization possesses a great level of ego. It is this ego that is conceptualized as being an offensive subject, aggressive, fighting and struggling to take over the universe that has, for a long time, remained resistant. Marcuse further explains that the subject continually strives to extend its power in order to continue controlling nature. This struggle is achieved through labor (Abromeit & Cobb 142). According to Marcuse, the Logos of the performance principle is the logic of domination. The logic derives its culmination from the reality principle that can only be found in an advanced industrial society. This forms the definition of the performance principle. The performance principle presents hostility to the receptive faculties and sense, which fight for fulfillment and gratification. From the start of the Western philosophy, Marcuse argues that the hegemonic version of the functionality principle has faced many challenges. An opposing harmony and reconciliation ideal has been formed against the antagonistic struggle that exists between the object and the subject in the functionality principle (Abromeit & Cobb 152). In the opposing formulation, the subject strives to achieve gratification and fulfillment. Marcuse suggests that the Logos of gratification in the concept of nous theos that was developed by Aristotle. The Logos is also found in the ideal that was developed by Hegel who asserted that the subject comes to fruition in complete knowledge. The subject aims at attaining the reconciliation condition through struggle, hard labor and suffering. Once the subject achieves this, alienation finally comes to an end. Schopenhauer agrees with Marcuse on the idea of striving restlessly while seeking peace. Marcuse also argues that the gratification logic is in Nietzsche’s focus on passion, the body, joy and freedom from guilt and time (Abromeit & Cobb 191). These conceptions exist in the gratification ideal. Marcuse argues that the values that exist in the performance principle stress on sensitivity, receptivity, non-violence and tenderness. These values are the opposite of exploitation and domination. According to Freire, all individuals possess the culture of silence, no matter how submerged of ignorant they might be. He explains that people are able to critically look into their own world through the process of interacting and communicating with each other (Dale & Hyslop-Margison 51). Through these actions, individuals gain the ability to understand their personal and social reality, evaluate it and take an appropriate action towards it. Freire, according to his concept of the culture of silence, states that the point of view of an oppressed or an illiterate person is transformed in a way that the individual can no longer be an object that responds directly as a surrounding social force (Dale & Hyslop-Margison 93). Freire explains that education conditions young individuals into becoming respected individuals in the status quo of the society. However, he also argues that education can become the source of freedom by helping people to creatively and critically deal reality and learn ways by which they can transform their worlds (Dale & Hyslop-Margison 82). Dehumanization affects individuals whose humanity has been stolen. It similarly affects the ones who steal other people’s humanity. In the recent study, four anti-dialogical were formed and identified as hegemony mechanisms that form a culture of silence. The anti-dialogical actions include conquest, divide and rule, manipulation and cultural invasion. According to the study, conquest is the development of domination relations and subordination. This is achieved through combining symbolic mystification and force. Divide and rule focuses on analyzing problems at a focalized view as opposed to looking at them like measurements of totality. Manipulation links the ends of a conquest through distortions of communication that are necessary for controlling democratic participations that could emerge. Cultural invasion contributes to conquest. This is achieved when it directly finds its way into group cultural contexts. Question 4 Freire developed the pedagogy of the oppressed with the aim of creating new relationships between the student, the teacher and the society. The pedagogy had its first publication in 1968. In 19780, Myra Ramos translated it into English. In his pedagogy, Freire included a critical analysis of the Marxist class. He brought out the analysis in his discussion about the colonized and the colonizer. He refers to pedagogy as a banking model because the model describes students as unfilled cans waiting to be filled with knowledge. In justifying for Freire’s pedagogy of the oppressed, there exists a contradiction between the oppressed and the oppressors and the possible ways of overcoming the vice. According to Freire, liberation is not a gift. It is a self-achievement through a mutual process. He further explains that the concept of education being a bank is a tool to oppression. He also poses an argument that education is an instrument that leads to liberation. In his book, Freire reviews the process through which oppression became justified. This occurred through a mutual process that occurred between the oppressed and the oppressor. Freire refers to this process as oppressors-oppressed distinction. During his study, he observed how leadership was balanced between the colonized and the colonizer in such a way that it remained constant. He finally admitted that powerless individuals in the society are sometimes afraid of attaining freedom. Freire states that freedom can only be achieved by conquest and not as a gift. In order to attain freedom, the oppressed must take the initiative of pursuing it constantly and responsibly. He states that freedom is not a myth or an ideal with its location around the environment of human beings. Freedom is a necessary requirement for each individual. This is because it is a form of completing the quest possessed by all humans. Freire further explains that when a balance between practice and theory becomes successful, freedom will give rise to praxis. In his book, Freire also highlights the approach of education as being a form of banking. However, he rejects this approach because according to him, this results into a the practice of dehumanization of the teacher and the student. He further states that banking approach increases the levels of attitudes that promote oppression in the society. He, instead, supports a more world-mediated idea that refers to education as a way of making people incomplete. This approach of education gives people an opportunity of becoming aware of their incompleteness. This makes them to start struggling to become fully human. This is described as a way of using education to shape members of the society. Gramsci’s view of political organization evolved over time. His view based on how the media produced encoded messages, how the audience decoded the messages and the domination of power in the processes (Borg, Buttigieg & Mayo 107). Gramci believed in democratic centralism. This is where debates and discussions were scheduled to occur during specific period in the policy formation. In his theory of philosophical fact, Gramsci gives an outline of the political practices that would adequately constitute the reality of politics. He configures his notion concerning what he refers to as ‘the political’ as a theoretical movement that lies within the context of politics (Borg, Buttigieg & Mayo 121). His emphasis puts focus on realization and theorization. They constitute a major metaphysical event. Gramsci gives an elaboration of the form of social organization in which he gives an example of permitting the industrial workers in Russia to forge a composite body with other workers who face oppression in different sectors. According to Gramsci, the industrial workers provided other workers with democratic leadership and a chance to participate in expensive political forms (Borg, Buttigieg & Mayo 137). This was a metaphysical event that led to the rapture of the political society of the state. Gramsci explains that the act was aimed at subtracting social forces and relations from the bourgeois political (Borg, Buttigieg & Mayo 192). This could only be achieved by active demonstration of the potential for an alternative form of political and social organization based upon radically non-speculative, different and non-hierarchical principles. Work cited: Abromeit, John, and W M. Cobb. Herbert Marcuse: A Critical Reader. New York: Routledge, 2004. Print. Borg, Carmel, Joseph A. Buttigieg, and Peter Mayo. Gramsci and Education. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2002. Print. Dale, John A, and Emery J. Hyslop-Margison. Paulo Freire: Teaching for Freedom and Transformation : the Philosophical Influences on the Work of Paulo Freire. Dordrecht: Springer, 2010. Print. Read More