While Freire makes a strong case with this approach, I believe that it is unlikely that people will succeed by doing this solely. They will have to fight repeatedly to obtain what they have hoped for, desired and wanted unconsciously for so long. But, is the uneducated oppressor ready to understand their needs?.
It seems that without simultaneously educating the oppressor and the oppressed, this concept would lead to a long and very difficult dialogue between those who govern and those who are governed. Unfortunately, the answer to absence of dialogue is often violence. The recent event of the Iraqi war provides an excellent demonstration of this point. Thousands of people, the "oppressed", demonstrated their opinion against the war but the "oppressors" ignored them. The example used highlights the importance of the need to simultaneously educate the "oppressors" as well as the "oppressed". .
Plato wrote: "It is philosophy that offers a vantage point from which we can discern in all cases what is just for communities and for individuals, and that accordingly the human race will not see better days until either the stock of those who rightly and genuinely follow philosophy acquire political authority, or else the class who have political control be led by some dispensation of providence to become real philosophers." (Letter VII, 326ab). I strongly believe that Plato's argument is valid. In my view, the important element is to open the way to a new era of politicians who would respect individuals and give to the people who trust them the opportunity to act as responsible adults by offering them the choice of leading their own lives.
The view of Freire on this matter is to educate and open the oppressed, to a new way of thinking, which he calls "Critical Thinking".
His thesis is to replace the culture of silence with a culture of dialogue. He develops this concept by opposing two types of education: the "banking education" and the "problem-solving education".
