44
4 Theoretical Framework
4.1.1 Power in the Work of Freire
In the work of Freire, power is negotiated in a dialectical relationship between the
oppressed and oppressors (Freire, 2005; Freire & Macedo, 1995; Freire & Mellado,
1973; McLaughlin & DeVoogd, 2004). Power, however, is not limited to the oppressors, meaning that the group/individual being oppressed have the power to resist
and react to oppression. In Freire’s work, questioning and/or challenging offers the
means to cross the “terrain of power” (Jones, 1999, p. 306). By questioning and/or
challenging the status quo, ‘the oppressed’ can disturb patterns of power (Freire,
2005).
Typically, Freire’s understandings of power involve challenging any oppressive
dimension, for instance by comprehending and thinking beyond the information
provided on a printed page. Thus, readers can engage in critical and active reading by
questioning, examining and disputing what they have read (McLaughlin & DeVoogd,
2004), thereby providing a vehicle to cross the threshold of the “terrain of power”
(Jones, 1999, p. 306). In doing so readers gain a voice through which they can
fully participate and challenge patterns of power in their relationship with the
author. Because critical and active reading involves more than deciphering codes
(McLaughlin & DeVoogd, 2004) and understanding language, Freire provides a
vehicle for me to comprehend and challenge a range of “diverse beliefs, positions and
understandings” in social investment policies and practice (McLaughlin & DeVoogd,
2004, p. 139).
Furthermore, we readily accept that some groups in society are relatively powerful
compared to others, with powerful groups having a vested interest in maintaining
their power (Macdonald et al., 2002). The group subjected to others’ power is generally unconsciously contained by its condition (Freire & Mellado, 1973). Sometimes,
powerful groups “cannot find in this power the strength to liberate either the oppressed
or themselves” (Freire & Mellado, 1973, p. 21) from this long-standing relationship.
As a result, powerful groups tend to exhibit what Freire calls ‘false generosity’
(Freire & Macedo, 1995; Freire & Mellado, 1973). False generosity refers to the
conscious or unconscious efforts of powerful groups to provide other groups with
the impression of a beneficial relationship. The underlying objective of this relationship is, however, to preserve the pre-existing power relations. According to Freire
(Freire & Macedo, 1995; Freire & Mellado, 1973), false generosity occurs in welfare
programmes that foster a culture of dependency in their recipients. False generosity
is mostly implicit and subtle and is characterised by the absence of strategies that
enhances beneficiaries’ independence.
In this research, I use Freire in two ways. First, to investigate whether, through
social investment, participants have established and maintained a relationship with
their host communities through coercion via O&G social investment, as framed
within Freire’s notion of power; and second, to analyse how experts, when representing a powerful group, make use of social investment as a tool of false generosity.
Freire’s ideas (Freire & Macedo, 1995; Freire & Mellado, 1973) provide me with
instruments that help me to identify and challenge veiled fragments of oppression.
4 Theoretical Framework
4.1.1 Power in the Work of Freire
In the work of Freire, power is negotiated in a dialectical relationship between the
oppressed and oppressors (Freire, 2005; Freire & Macedo, 1995; Freire & Mellado,
1973; McLaughlin & DeVoogd, 2004). Power, however, is not limited to the oppressors, meaning that the group/individual being oppressed have the power to resist
and react to oppression. In Freire’s work, questioning and/or challenging offers the
means to cross the “terrain of power” (Jones, 1999, p. 306). By questioning and/or
challenging the status quo, ‘the oppressed’ can disturb patterns of power (Freire,
2005).
Typically, Freire’s understandings of power involve challenging any oppressive
dimension, for instance by comprehending and thinking beyond the information
provided on a printed page. Thus, readers can engage in critical and active reading by
questioning, examining and disputing what they have read (McLaughlin & DeVoogd,
2004), thereby providing a vehicle to cross the threshold of the “terrain of power”
(Jones, 1999, p. 306). In doing so readers gain a voice through which they can
fully participate and challenge patterns of power in their relationship with the
author. Because critical and active reading involves more than deciphering codes
(McLaughlin & DeVoogd, 2004) and understanding language, Freire provides a
vehicle for me to comprehend and challenge a range of “diverse beliefs, positions and
understandings” in social investment policies and practice (McLaughlin & DeVoogd,
2004, p. 139).
Furthermore, we readily accept that some groups in society are relatively powerful
compared to others, with powerful groups having a vested interest in maintaining
their power (Macdonald et al., 2002). The group subjected to others’ power is generally unconsciously contained by its condition (Freire & Mellado, 1973). Sometimes,
powerful groups “cannot find in this power the strength to liberate either the oppressed
or themselves” (Freire & Mellado, 1973, p. 21) from this long-standing relationship.
As a result, powerful groups tend to exhibit what Freire calls ‘false generosity’
(Freire & Macedo, 1995; Freire & Mellado, 1973). False generosity refers to the
conscious or unconscious efforts of powerful groups to provide other groups with
the impression of a beneficial relationship. The underlying objective of this relationship is, however, to preserve the pre-existing power relations. According to Freire
(Freire & Macedo, 1995; Freire & Mellado, 1973), false generosity occurs in welfare
programmes that foster a culture of dependency in their recipients. False generosity
is mostly implicit and subtle and is characterised by the absence of strategies that
enhances beneficiaries’ independence.
In this research, I use Freire in two ways. First, to investigate whether, through
social investment, participants have established and maintained a relationship with
their host communities through coercion via O&G social investment, as framed
within Freire’s notion of power; and second, to analyse how experts, when representing a powerful group, make use of social investment as a tool of false generosity.
Freire’s ideas (Freire & Macedo, 1995; Freire & Mellado, 1973) provide me with
instruments that help me to identify and challenge veiled fragments of oppression.