DecolonialEducation

Dussel understands liberty as a practice over the coloniality of power, knowing and being: a humanizing transformation of the oppressed. It is a change that is built from the ordinary, from the recovering of the ashes of the past and the creation of new paths for the present (Sirnes, 2015, p.65). Consequently, Dussel proposes both a critical and a constructive perspective: (1) critical of eurocentrism, modernity and domination, (2) constructive because it proposes a pathway towards new alternatives (p.125). Interestingly, Dussel has claimed that Latin America is currently in the process of turning its back to hegemonic dominance, moving towards an independence from the Totality (p.14). Therefore, it is of relevance to explore the locus points of this liberation to empower them.

Departing from the notion that all aspects that allow for a problematization and a proposal to combat systems of oppression should entangle to enrich one another, this essay will delve into the proposal of Cabaluz-Ducasse of potentializing a dialogue between Latin American critical pedagogies - focused on projects of decolonisation that free education from its entanglement with modernity and coloniality - and La Filosofía de La Liberación. Through this ground, I wish to explore the liberatory potential of the educational transformations undertaken by the recent configuration of the Estado Plurinacional de Bolivia. To do so, the paper will delve into three points of relatedness between these practices: the recognition of the oppressed Other, the praxis of liberation and the decoloniality of education. Furthermore, it will delve into the needs of reconfiguring classroom limits to take education outside the institution that currently prisons it.

Filosofía de la Liberación and Critical Pedagogies of Latin America

Dussel (2018) criticises the formal character of educational reforms; they focus on the procedure and the techniques of pedagogy, but there is no mention of the content. And what drastically requires a change is exactly that, what it is that is being learned, and from where that learning takes place (7:00-9:35). Modern education is the education of “orphans,” of children with no antecedents, no stories. The education of Emile´s (Rousseau, 1763).
An Otomí child enters a classroom

— hats’i, haxajuä — she says.
— Don´t talk to me in that language, its of the savages — replies the teacher.

The kid goes home and tells her mother that she will not talk that ugly language anymore.

But education could depart from other places, from children that live and come from different lands, each with their own history, language and culture (Freire, 1972).

An Otomí child enters a classroom

— What language do you speak? — Asks the teacher
— I speak spanish but I express myself better in Otomí” “— replies the child.
— Ah, you are wise, you speak more than one language! you are the son of a pueblo with a lot of history and knoweldges different to mine! We will study together the story of the Otomí so that we learn together about each other — says the teacher.

The child goes home and tells her mother that she is wise for speaking Otomí, and that she told their story to the entire class at school.

Ancestral knowledges, wisdoms hidden within the memories of the elderly, dying with and through the systemic oppression enforced upon pueblos. These all wished to be recovered by Critical Pedagogies of Latin America through a decoloniality of education (Cabaluz-Ducasse, 2013, p.143). Firstly, they emphasize the need to understand Latin America as an oppressed Other, full of silenced stories. Secondly, education should contribute to the creation of critical communities that seek a transformation through re-appropriating their beings. Thirdly, they seek a decolonial epistemology: one that takes with seriousness negated knowledge (p.143).

La Filosofía de la Liberación, centred on the distinctiveness of the Other, can bring forward to critical pedagogies the concern of not conceiving a distinction between modernity and post-modernity. A diversity of cultures was saved and maintained at the margins of European modernity, they never became modern, and hence their integration into the liberation project cannot be perceived as postmodern (Dussel, 2006, p.46). Therefore, Dussel proposes the concept of transmodernity: of not departing from modernity to establish liberation, but to escort the exteriority of modernity, the cultures of periphery into intercultural dialogues that push to light the myth of modernity: “the inexistent symmetry between cultures” (p.47).

Further relevant for pedagogical thought, Dussel argues that this dialogue should not solely be thought of as a centre-periphery conversation. Rather, it should firstly be a dialogue between the differences within the periphery. Before opening up a north-south discussion, there has to be a south-south sharing that liberates the otherness from its epistemological, social and political colonization (Dussel, 2006, p.56). Inevitably, through its practice, education should not strive for a remote past or a utopian future, but a development of a decolonial thinking in its curricula and its students to find other ways of knowing through which to critique and displace the imperial/modernity logics (Sirnes, 2015, p.57). It is not an anti-modernity project based on negation, but one based on affirmation and incorporation of the exteriority; of the invisibilized otherness (p.132).

Consequently, despite the distinct historical, epistemological and disciplinary paths of critical pedagogies and La Filosofía de La Liberación, both matters possess important points of relatedness (Cabaluz-Ducasse, 2015, p.80). Thus, seeing the two critiques as companions in constant dialogue with one another can enrich the potential of the transformations that they can bring. Moreover, it allows for a critical perspective on liberatory practices that are actively being undertaken (p.81).

THE OPPRESSED OTHER

Former colonies of Occident, such as Bolivia, have shown deep intolerance towards the originative pueblos: those enslaved to carry what is thought of as an ahistorical cultural and linguistic poverty (Instituto de Estudios Bolivianos, 2009, p.7). The pedagogical methodologies of colonial states have for long been weak adaptations of models of the Occident (Ledezma, 2016, p.53). This eurocentric influence can be seen during three major educational reforms of Bolivia: the liberal (1899-1920), the nationalist (1854-1964) and the neoliberal (1994-2004) (Iño, 2017, p.144).

Firstly, the liberal educational reform came along through the need of citizens better prepared for capitalist technified production (Iño, 2012, p.164). The reform aimed at “civilization” and “progress” towards modernization (Iño, 2017, p.147). Within these, diversity and pluralism were seen as inhibitors of development, which instead required a united Bolivian identity (p.148). To achieve this, emphasis was placed on giving access to education to the excluded pueblos. Through this, the indigenous could be brought towards bolovianidad, turning them into “docile instruments of labour (...) disqualified socially and culturally through the negation of their cultural identities” (p.147). In a similar way, the nationalist reform placed further importance to a technical education for the modernization of industry and production (p.148). The indigenous were brought inside civil life, incorporated in the market economy of capitalism - becoming owners of private land - through their categorization as campesinos (p.148). Lastly, once again the neoliberal reform followed global educational trends, adhering to a constructivist model and the neoliberal value system (Ledezma, 2016, p.53). The reform gave importance to multiculturality. Nonetheless, the multiplicity of cultures was hierarchized, resulting in a mere ideological support for the social, economic and political inequalities (p.149). As suggested by Rojas (1999; in Iño, 2017, p.149) the indigenous were educated due to the need of their labouring hands, not for conceiving them as citizens.

Therefore, understood from a Dusselian perspective, education has been used as an alienating tool that negates the Other its right to be Other. By seeing exteriority through utilitarian lenses, the three aforementioned educational reforms seeked to assimilate the Other in the dominant system. Hence, within the Totality, there can be a coexistence of diversity, but only one that is vertical in its structure, where the oppressed is not a danger for the system (Sirnes, 2015, p.93). Consequently, liberation can solely come through the acknowledgement of the Other that the system is a threat for its communal and individual being (p.94). In this regard, it is from the corporeality of pain of those at the margins and the exclusion of their discursive participation where an ethico-critical consciousness towards the Totality arises (p.95).

However, it is important to mention that Dussel does not claim that the etico-critical consciousness can only be developed by the Other. A growth of critical thinking and sympathy for the Other can plant the seeds towards learning to listen (Sirnes, 2015, pp.120-122). Because of this, La Filosofía de La Liberación recognizes the importance of education to allow for a one-on-one connection between the oppressor and the oppressed that forments lived experiences of the Subject with the Other; easing the possibility of an inter subjects comprehension that enhances the possibilities of liberation. However, major educational transformations are required for this to take place, for the Other to be the voice and the Subject the active ears (Dussel, 2006,p.72).

PRAXIS OF LIBERATION

Nonetheless, from the establishment of the new political constitution of the Estado Plurinacional de Bolivia in 2009, the realities of colonial mentality became a problematised matter for the state and its institutions (Iño, 2017, p.150). In this regard, the constitution introduces the disruptive and creative philosophy of Buen Vivir - originated in the indigenous cultures of the continent - as a backbone to its policies and concerns (Ledezma, 2016, p.44). Buen Vivir is about living well between us, a communitary cohabitation without power asymmetries: it is not possible to Vivir Bien if others viven mal (Ledezma, 2016,p.49). This englobes all forms of life: human and non-human alike. It is a practice that is in antithesis to capitalism’s pressures to live at the expense of the other, to vivir mejor (p.49). Breaking free from linear and accumulative notions of progress and development - possible only through exploitation, appropriation and competition - Buen Vivir proposes a living in which all beings compliment each other (p.50). As stated in the Plan Nacional de Desarrollo of the Estado Plurinacional (2006), it is a dialogue with and from our cultures, a conception of life, a culture of life (p.8).

How then, can this be translated in an education that shares this philosophy of life? That gives the tools to critically identify and actively enforce the disruptive and creative forces of their culture(s)? Disruptive as it breaks free from the nation's dependency of Occident´s thoughts. Creative as it proposes personal and communal transformations towards liberation (Ledezma, 2016, p.50). Previously emplaced pedagogies have been marked by discrimination and beliefs of superiority of the Totality against the Other. To disrupt this, a horizontal dialogue from the Other and with the Other has to be developed (Sirnes, 2015, p.12). Leading to pueblos that value their own plurality of identities. Taking this into consideration, the educational transformations of Bolivia are not solely evoking the actors of the educational sectors, but the Pueblo as an ensemble. The latest Ley de la Educación, set up in 2010, claims that education in Bolivia is diverse and plural, relevant to the geographical, social, cultural and linguistic context of its students (Ledezma, 2016, p.50). Moreover, it is inclusive, sharer of knowledges and ways of knowing that are pertinent to the necessities of all inhabitants (Iño, 2017, p.150).

In this regard, the constitutional and political changes of Bolivia are a witness of how a reconfiguration of an alternative political order can insert the ethico-critical consciousness that Dussel sees as crucial for a possible transformation (García, 2011, p.65). Nonetheless, the new political order presented by Bolivia can potentialize a decolonization of the nation, but it does not guarantee it (p.65). A cultural shift is still needed within the authorities that are proposing the change, and until a decolonization of political power through which the community can retake a place in political processes, it is important to maintain an active critique of all proposed policies (pp.65-66). Hence, Dussel would be positive about the adherence to Buen Vivir, something crucial to start noticing new possible realities of living. Nonetheless, its configuration should remain flexible, open for change. The Other has been noticed, the challenge now is for them to be included (p.66).

EPISTEMOLOGICAL DECOLONIZATION

Departing from recognizing the domination of the Sistema-Mundo and the oppression of the modernity/coloniality binary, critical pedagogies and Dussel´s philosophical thought revindicate the resistance in the Otherness of epistemology (Cabaluz-Ducasse, 2013, p.151). Combatting mono-cultural understandings of absolute truth in Science. Through a decoloniality of epistemology, sustained in heterogeneous knowings that are dynamically tentacularised, both sites of understanding find the possibility of a radical displacement from Modernity´s forms of action and thought (p.152).
Hence, education detaches from practices of “traditional” education. It requires an epistemological rupture from the rationalism that supposes the existence of an an objective gaze that is the fundament of true knowledge. In this regard, the new Ley de Educación sees education as a process that allows student-student, teacher-student, student-teacher dialogues (Iño, 2017, p.151), creating a harmonious capacity of critical reflection and connectivity from a holistic framework. This, is expressed in four dimensions: Spiritual (To be), Cognitive (To know), Productive (To do) and Organizational (To decide), which make up the spine of a curriculum that calls for a decolonial epistemology (Ledezma, 2016, p.51).

As stated by the Ministry of Education (2013), the Occident sees Science as the only bearer of knowledge and truth (p.39). Knowledge produced by pueblos are recognized, developing the basis of the social organization; economic and cultural (p.12). Consequently, Scientific knowledge is to be shared in dialogue and complementarity with the understanding of the backgrounds of all students and their cultures, allowing for the creation of new - intercultural and enriched - knowledges (See Fig.1) (p.41). It is through participatory interactions that the comprehensions and resources of the originator pueblos can be recovered (p.42).
Moving beyond this, Dussel makes a significant emphasis on the concept of domination. In this regard, eurocentrism is also a domination as praxis, interrelated in four forms: political domination of (1) the center towards the periphery, (2) of the national elite towards the pueblo, (3) the domination of the male against the female subject and (4) the domination of the teacher against the student (Sirne, 2015, p.77). Within this, a dialogue with La Filosofía de la Liberación could potentialise the transformative act of Bolivian´s pedagogical thought and practice.

The Ministry of Education (2012), established a Central Curriculum through which to achieve its educational aims. This curriculum is described as a “communitarian document:” it is created in a double process that includes the necessities of the specific materiality of the areas in which it will be used. As such, the generalities of the curriculum are proposed by the political institution, but the specificities are developed by the teachers of each educational centre to answer to the pedagogical needs of the community (pp.72-73). Consequently, despite the potential of this practice, Dussel´s (2006) view that transmodernity can only arise from the exteriority (p.47), serves as a point of critique. Although given as suggestions, the current curriculum is still being established, in general, from centre to periphery - from the national elite domination over the pueblo, in particular, from the domination of the teacher against the student, and indirectly by the shadowing of the male subject against the female.

RECONFIGURATION OF CLASSROOM LIMITS

Educational transformations of this sort require time. Liberation and the move towards transmodernity will not see an abrupt moment of change. Nonetheless, from where I am currently writing, around ten years have gone by since the Ley de Educación was passed in Bolivia. Significant changes have been achieved, but the enforcement of the transformations have been hindered by opposition; coming both from the centre and the periphery (Curivil & Pinto, 2020, p.84). These should not come as a surprise. Wishing to develop values of Buen Vivir on children becomes difficult when these values are not yet found in the adults of the classroom and the institutions. The implementation of the reforms have not been able to unfold within the still-to-be-transformed rigid parameters of colonial legacies (p.93). Nonetheless, this does not mean to claim that a willingness for liberation should not place emphasis on education. The importance is to recognize that Bolivian authorities still work within frameworks of eurocentrism.

Hence, both Dussel´s philosophy and Latin American critical pedagogies find a place for their liberatory and decolonial projects beyond the school, the educational system and institutionalized learning. There has to be a reconstruction not only of the education of the school, but also the education of the street, the community, the art… (Ledezma, 2016, p.50). Consequently, pedagogical projects that think from the school, against the school, and beyond the school carry the greatest potential for transformation (Cabaluz-Ducasse, 2013, p.158).

Firstly, to install politico-pedagogic practices against the school requires criticising the modern visions of schooling, recognizing the significance of a multiplicity of socio-educational spaces (Cabaluz-Ducasse, 2013, p.159). Moving from here, the reproductive, competitive, disciplined, individualist and alienist characteristics of traditional pedagogical thinking and political practices have to be disrupted. Culture and knowledge cannot be boxed into what is scholarly legitimized, valuing other forms of understanding and knowledge creations distinct and differentiated from formal educational systems (p.160). Secondly, politico-pedagogic practices from the school require the inclusion of critical popular movements and organizations in institutional decision makings that allow knowledge to be both created and used outside the classrooms (p.160). Accordingly, the educational values that the learning sights of partaking in social movements have to be considered. In these, individuals are challenged to creatively think-beyond; to enforce original ways of disruption (pp.160-161). Consequently, within the popular movement, the peripheral awakenings, a boiling soup of multilayered transformative, libertory and identity-empowering educational spaces are to be found. The question then is how these spaces can be opened up and made useful.

CONCLUSION

In a process towards configuring a project of transmodernity that will free Latin America from the domination of the legacies of the modernity/coloniality binary, La Filosofia de La Liberación and critical pedagogies can enrich their practices by coming into dialogue with one another. Furthermore, they can provide key points of departure from which to share critical and constructive analysis of on-going projects of independence, such as the one opened up by the educational reforms of Bolivia in 2010. Moving beyond this text, it would also be beneficial to entangle what can be learned from the case of Bolivia, both from other areas of the periphery and from the centre. Furthermore, it will be of relevance to compare this case with other on-going pedagogical transformations in order to comprehend the implementability of the needed reforms, dialogues and consensus.

REFERENCES

Cabaluz-Ducasse, J.F. (2013). Contribuciones de la Filosofía de La Liberación a las Pedagogías Críticas Latinoamericanas: Una aproximación teórica-política a la obra de Enrique Dussel. Facultad de Filosofía y Letras. Retrieved from http://repositorio.filo.uba.ar/bitstream/handle/filodigital/4274/uba_ffyl_t_2014_895584.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

Curivil, F., & Pinto, L. (2020). Apuntes para un análisis de la Ley Educativa N° 070 Avelino Siñani y Elizardo Pérez en el escenario actual de Bolivia. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.17648/textura-2358-0801-v22n51-5682

Dussel, E. (2006). Filosofía de la cultura y la liberación. UACM. http://biblioteca.clacso.edu.ar/clacso/otros/20120227024607/filosofia.pdf

Dussel, C. (2018) [Carlos Ometochtzin]. (2016, October 9). La transformación de la educación hacia la descolonización de la pedagogía [Video]. Youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sWg94cBYDrM&t=2921s

Estado Plurinacional de Bolivia (2006), Plan Nacional de Desarrollo. Retrieved from https://www.bivica.org/file/view/id/4096

Freire, P. (1972). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Herder and Herder.

García, A.P. (2011). El proyecto des-colonial en Enrique Dussel y Walter Mignolo: hacia una epistemología otra de las ciencias sociales en América Latina. Cultura y representaciones sociales, 5(10), pp.57-81. Retrieved from http://www.scielo.org.mx/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2007-81102011000100003&lng=es&tlng=es.

Instituto de Estudios Bolivianos. (2009). La Pedagogíca Latinoamericana de Enrique Dussel. Retrieved from https://www.academia.edu/36761106/Dussel_enrique_la_pedagogica_latinoamericana_1_

Iño, W. (2012). La reforma educativa liberal (1899- 1920) modernización de la educación pública en Bolivia. Estudios Bolivianos 16, pp. 159-205. Retrieved from http://www.revistasbolivianas.org.bo/scielo.php?pid=S2078-03622012000100008&script=sci_arttext

Iño, W. (2017). Una mirada a las reformas educativas y la formación de la ciudadanía en Bolivia (Siglo XX y XXI). Alteridad, 12(2), pp.144-154. Retrieved from . http://doi.org/10.17163/alt.v12n2.2017.01.

Mejía, Marco Raúl (2013). Educaciones y Pedagogías Críticas del Sur (Cartografías de la Educación Popular). Editorial Quimantú. Santiago.

Ministerio de Educación del Estado Plurinacional de Bolivia. (2012). Programa de formación complementaria para maestras y maestros en ejercicio. Profocom. Retrieved from https://www.minedu.gob.bo/files/publicaciones/veaye/dgea/uf4_epja_2015.pdf

Rousseau, J. (1763). Emile: Or, On education. New York: Basic Books

Sirnes, L.V. (2015). La Filosofía de La Liberación: como filosofía y praxis. Instituto Interuniversitario de Desarrollo Social y Paz.

Retrieved from https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/61466634.pdf

Walsh, Catherine (2009). “Interculturalidad crítica y pedagogía decolonial: In-surgir, reexistir y re-vivir”. En Vera Candau (edit.) (2009). Educaçao intercultural hoje en América Latina: concepçoes, tensoes e propostas. PUC Educación on-line. Río de Janeiro.