The oppressed must reach conviction as Subjects, not receive it as objects

Evidence

Likewise, the oppressed (who do not commit themselves to the struggle unless they are convinced, and who, if they do not make such a commitment, withhold the indispensable conditions for this struggle) must reach this conviction as Subjects, not as objects. They also must intervene critically in the situation which surrounds them and whose mark they bear; propaganda cannot achieve this. While the conviction of the necessity for struggle (without which the struggle is unfeasible) is indispensable to the revolutionary leadership (indeed, it was this conviction which constituted that leadership), it is also necessary for the oppressed. It is necessary, that is, unless one intends to carry out the transformation for the oppressed rather than with them. It is my belief that only the latter form of transformation is valid. — Paulo Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed, 171

Categorization

• XREF: Directly parallels the reader’s stated contest: Freire’s own ‘transformation with not for’ is the standard against which any new-vanguard facilitator must be judged — echo of ‘The Banking Concept’ chapter’s Subject/object dichotomy. — connects to: The category of the Other precedes and enables material oppression, not vice versa — Simone de Beauvoir, The Second Sex, 147; Oppressed groups become Subjects by saying ‘we,’ which women have failed to do. — Simone de Beauvoir, The Second Sex, 56; Standpoint knowledge of the oppressed is achieved through struggle, not automatic — Mark Fisher (edited by Darren Ambrose), K-Punk: The Collected and Unpublished…, 1376 (+2 more)
• QUESTION: The unresolved pressure point: if conviction ‘constituted’ the leadership, what makes their forming it legitimate while implanting it in others is not — Freire asserts rather than proves the asymmetry.