(Ebook) Class in Education: Knowledge, pedagogy, and

subjectivity by Deborah Kelsh, Dave Hill, Sheila

Macrine ISBN 0415450276 Pdf Download

https://ebooknice.com/product/class-in-education-knowledge-pedagogy-
and-subjectivity-2205690

★★★★★
4.8 out of 5.0 (98 reviews )

Instant PDF Download

ebooknice.com
 (Ebook) Class in Education: Knowledge, pedagogy, and
subjectivity by Deborah Kelsh, Dave Hill, Sheila Macrine
ISBN 0415450276 Pdf Download

EBOOK

Available Formats

■ PDF eBook Study Guide Ebook

EXCLUSIVE 2025 EDUCATIONAL COLLECTION - LIMITED TIME

INSTANT DOWNLOAD VIEW LIBRARY

Here are some recommended products for you. Click the link to
download, or explore more at ebooknice.com

(Ebook) Biota Grow 2C gather 2C cook by Loucas, Jason; Viles,

James ISBN 9781459699816, 9781743365571, 9781925268492,
1459699815, 1743365578, 1925268497

https://ebooknice.com/product/biota-grow-2c-gather-2c-cook-6661374

(Ebook) Matematik 5000+ Kurs 2c Lärobok by Lena Alfredsson, Hans

Heikne, Sanna Bodemyr ISBN 9789127456600, 9127456609

https://ebooknice.com/product/matematik-5000-kurs-2c-larobok-23848312

(Ebook) SAT II Success MATH 1C and 2C 2002 (Peterson's SAT II

Success) by Peterson's ISBN 9780768906677, 0768906679

https://ebooknice.com/product/sat-ii-success-math-1c-and-2c-2002-peterson-
s-sat-ii-success-1722018

(Ebook) Master SAT II Math 1c and 2c 4th ed (Arco Master the SAT
Subject Test: Math Levels 1 & 2) by Arco ISBN 9780768923049,
0768923042

https://ebooknice.com/product/master-sat-ii-math-1c-and-2c-4th-ed-arco-
master-the-sat-subject-test-math-levels-1-2-2326094
(Ebook) Cambridge IGCSE and O Level History Workbook 2C - Depth
Study: the United States, 1919-41 2nd Edition by Benjamin
Harrison ISBN 9781398375147, 9781398375048, 1398375144,
1398375047
https://ebooknice.com/product/cambridge-igcse-and-o-level-history-
workbook-2c-depth-study-the-united-states-1919-41-2nd-edition-53538044

(Ebook) The Developing World and State Education: Neoliberal

Depredation and Egalitarian (Routledge Studies in Education and
Neoliberalism) by DAVE HILL ISBN 9780203889251, 9780415957762,
0203889258, 0415957761
https://ebooknice.com/product/the-developing-world-and-state-education-
neoliberal-depredation-and-egalitarian-routledge-studies-in-education-and-
neoliberalism-1883186

(Ebook) Global Neoliberalism And Education And Its Consequences

by Dave Hill, Ravi Kumar ISBN 9780203891858, 0203891856

https://ebooknice.com/product/global-neoliberalism-and-education-and-its-
consequences-56921598

(Ebook) Class in the Composition Classroom: Pedagogy and the

Working Class by Genesea M. Carter, William H. Thelin ISBN
9781607326182, 1607326183

https://ebooknice.com/product/class-in-the-composition-classroom-pedagogy-
and-the-working-class-57145994

(Ebook) Animals and Science Education: Ethics, Curriculum and

Pedagogy by Michael P. Mueller, Deborah J. Tippins, Arthur J.
Stewart (eds.) ISBN 9783319563749, 9783319563756, 3319563742,
3319563750
https://ebooknice.com/product/animals-and-science-education-ethics-
curriculum-and-pedagogy-5883956
Class in Education
Knowledge, pedagogy, subjectivity

Edited by Deborah Kelsh, Dave Hill

and Sheila Macrine
First published 2010
by Routledge
2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN
Simultaneously published in the USA and Canada
by Routledge
270 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016
Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business
This edition published in the Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2009.
To purchase your own copy of this or any of Taylor & Francis or Routledge’s
collection of thousands of eBooks please go to www.eBookstore.tandf.co.uk.
© 2010 Deborah Kelsh, Dave Hill and Sheila Macrine for editorial material
and selection. Individual contributors, their contribution.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or
utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now
known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in
any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing
from the publishers.
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library
Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data
Class in education : knowledge, pedagogy, subjectivity / edited by Deborah
Kelsh, Dave Hill, and Sheila Macrine.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
1. Educational sociology. 2. Critical pedagogy. 3. Educational
equalization. 4. Social classes—Economic aspects. I. Kelsh, Deborah. II.
Hill, Dave, 1945- III. Macrine, Sheila L.
LC189.C545 2010
306.43s—dc22 2009009253

ISBN 0-203-87093-X Master e-book ISBN

ISBN 10: 0-415-45027-6 (hbk)

ISBN 10: 0-203-87903-X (ebk)
ISBN 13: 978-0-415-45027-0 (hbk)
ISBN 13: 978-0-203-87093-8 (ebk)
Contents

List of figures vii

Notes on contributors viii

Foreword xi
E. SAN JUAN, JR .

Introduction 1
SHEILA MACRINE, DAVE HILL AND DEB OR AH KELSH

1 Cultureclass 6
DEB OR AH KELSH

2 Hypohumanities 39
TERESA L. EBERT AND MAS’UD ZAVARZADEH

3 Persistent inequities, obfuscating explanations: reinforcing the lost

centrality of class in Indian education debates 66
R AVI KUMAR

4 Class, “race” and state in post-apartheid education 87

ENVER MOTALA AND SALIM VALLY

5 Racism and Islamophobia in post 7/7 Britain: Critical Race Theory,

(xeno-)racialization, empire and education – a Marxist
analysis 108
MIKE COLE AND ALPESH MAISURIA

6 Marxism, critical realism and class: implications for a socialist

pedagogy 128
GR ANT BANFIELD
vi Contents
7 Globalization, class, and the social studies curriculum 153
E. WAYNE ROSS AND GREG QUEEN

8 Class: the base of all reading 175

ROBERT FAIVRE

Afterword: the contradictions of class and the praxis

of becoming 196
PETER MCLAREN

Index of names 202

Figures

6.1 Strong historical materialism 140

6.2 The dimensions of spacio-temporal extension and ontological
generality 144
6.3 The three-dimensional modal operation incorporating vantage
point 145
7.1 Fred Wright cartoon, ‘So Long Partner!’ 163
7.2 ‘CEO Pay,’ from A Field Guide to the U.S. Economy 164
Contributors

Grant Banfield teaches educational sociology and qualitative approaches to research

in the School of Education at Flinders University, Adelaide. His intellectual
interests lie in the application of Marxism and critical realist philosophy to the
problems of education, schooling and “critical” pedagogy in contemporary capital-
ist society. Grant’s research interests center on contributing to the development
of emancipatory social science and practice directed towards the realization of an
ecologically sane and truly human future.
Mike Cole is Research Professor in Education and Equality, and Head of Research at
Bishop Grosseteste University College Lincoln, UK. He has published widely in
the area of education and equality, racism, and Marxism and educational theory.
He is the author of Marxism and Educational Theory: origins and issues, (2008), the
editor of Professional Attributes and Practice for Student Teachers, 4th Edition (2008),
and Education, Equality and Human Rights: issues of gender, “race,” sexuality, disability
and social class, 2nd edition, all published by Routledge.
Teresa L. Ebert’s writings include Ludic Feminism and After and The Task of Cultural
Critique. She is co-author (with Mas’ud Zavarzadeh) of Class in Culture and co-ed-
itor of two volumes in the Transformation series on Marxism and postmodernity
and on Marxism, queer theory and gender. The essay on “hypohumanities” in this
book is an excerpt from the book she has co-written, titled Hypohumanities.
Robert Faivre teaches a range of courses for the English Division at Adirondack
Community College, State University of New York (US), where he is a Professor.
His interests are in the intersections of reading and class, and he is working on a
book that develops a materialist theory of reading.
Dave Hill is Professor of Education Policy at the University of Northampton, UK,
and Chief Editor, Journal for Critical Education Policy Studies, at www.jceps.com.
He heads the independent e-Institute for Education Policy Studies, at www.
ieps.org.uk. He is the Series Editor for Education and Neoliberalism, and for
Education and Marxism, both published by Routledge. He lectures worldwide
on Marxism and Education and on Radical/Socialist education.
 Notes on contributors ix
Deborah Kelsh is an Associate Professor in the Department of Teacher Education
at The College of Saint Rose in Albany, New York (US). Her scholarship focuses
on the question of class in relation to the production of knowledge and pedagogy.
She has publications in several journals, including The Red Critique and Cultural
Logic, and a chapter in Feminism and Composition Studies (1998). She is working on
a book on materialist pedagogy.
Ravi Kumar teaches sociology in the Department of Sociology, Jamia Millia Islamia
University, New Delhi. He has experience working with the students’ movement
and other grassroots movements in backward regions of India. His publications
include The Politics of Imperialism and Counterstrategies (co-edited, Delhi: Aakar
Books, 2004); The Crisis of Elementary Education in India (edited, Sage, 2006); and
Global Neoliberalism and Education and its Consequences (co-edited, Routledge: New
York, 2008).
Peter McLaren, Ph.D., is a Professor at the Graduate School of Education and
Information Studies, University of California, Los Angeles. He is the author, co-
author, editor and co-editor of approximately 40 books and monographs. Several
hundred of his articles, chapters, interviews, reviews, commentaries and columns
have appeared in dozens of scholarly journals and professional magazines since the
publication of his first book, Cries from the Corridor, in 1980. His work has been
translated into 17 languages. He lectures internationally and is a member of the
Industrial Workers of the World.
Sheila Macrine, Ph.D., is an Associate Professor in the Curriculum and Teaching
Department at Montclair State University in New Jersey (US). Her scholarly
interests focus on connecting the cultural, institutional and personal contexts
of pedagogy, particularly as they relate to the social imagination and progressive
democratic education. She writes about the relationships among the complex
social issues of difference (race, class, gender and disability, etc.) within urban
schools and the political economy of schooling within the broader context of
post-industrial capitalism.
Alpesh Maisuria is a Senior Lecturer at the University of Wolverhampton, UK.
He teaches across a range of Education Studies modules. His specialization is
the sociology of education, particularly the analysis of “race” through social class,
adopting and developing a classical Marxist perspective. Alpesh has also published
papers exploring the private sector’s involvement in education. He has recently
explored the “war on terror” and its linkages to capitalist relations of produc-
tion, particularly exploring Critical Race Theory and the Marxist concept of
racialization.
Enver Motala was a lawyer for the independent trade union movement during the
apartheid era and also played a significant role in the anti-apartheid education
movement. After the first democratic elections, he was appointed the Deputy
Director-General of Education in the province of Gauteng. He is presently an as-
sociate of the Education Policy Consortium for whom he has coordinated research
x Notes on contributors
projects on democracy, human rights and social justice in education in South
Africa. He has also done similar work for the Nelson Mandela Foundation.
Greg Queen is a social studies teacher at Fitzgerald High School in Warren,
Michigan. He is co-editor of The Rouge Forum News and has made numerous
presentations at professional meetings, including the National Council for the
Social Studies and Michigan Council for the Social Studies. He is the lead author
of “‘I Participate, You Participate, We Participate…’: Notes on Building a K-16
Movement for Democracy and Social Justice,” published in Workplace: A Journal
for Academic Labor (www.workplace-gsc.com).
E. Wayne Ross is Professor in the Department of Curriculum Studies at the
University of British Columbia in Vancouver, Canada. He is the author of numer-
ous publications on curriculum theory, politics of education, and critical pedagogy.
His edited books include Battleground Schools: an encyclopedia of conflict and contro-
versy (Greenwood, co-edited with Sandra Mathison), Neoliberalism and Education
Reform (Hampton Press, co-edited with Rich Gibson) and Democratic Social
Education (RoutledgeFalmer, co-edited with David Hursh). He is a former day-
care and secondary school teacher and a co-founder of The Rouge Forum (www.
rougeforum.org).
E. San Juan, Jr. heads the Philippines Cultural Studies Center, Storrs, CT (US). He
is Emeritus Professor of English, Comparative Literature, and Ethnic Studies at
various universities. He was a fellow at the W.E.B. Du Bois Institute, Harvard
University, in Spring 2009. His recent books are In the Wake of Terror (Lexington)
and US Imperialism and Revolution in the Philippines (Palgrave).
Salim Vally is a member of the Faculty of Education, University of Johannesburg,
South Africa. He was a regional executive member of the high school South
African Students Movement until its banning in 1977. He is the spokesperson of
the Anti-War Coalition and the Palestine Solidarity Committee, serves on the
boards of various non-governmental and professional organizations, and is an
active member of various social movements. Vally is also the coordinator of the
Education Rights Project which works with communities in many townships
and informal settlements around the country.
Mas’ud Zavarzadeh is author of several books including Seeing Films Politically. His
new book, Totality and the Post, will be published early next year.
Foreword
E. San Juan, Jr.

With the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1989, the ruling classes of the industrial-
ized world celebrated the end of class struggle and the proverbial immortality of the
capitalist world-system. But scarcely had its first decade ended when disaster struck.
Behind the illusion of a permanent market utopia lurked internal decay, a precipitous
meltdown. September 11, 2001 was just a portent of the impending breakdown. With
the slide of the US and the world economy into an unprecedented impasse, a crisis
reminiscent of the 1929 Wall Street crash, but much more all-encompassing given the
“flat world” of globalized finance capital, we are faced with a lesson that should have
been learned when Marx and Engels invoked the “specter” of revolution in their 1848
Manifesto – the lesson of class struggle as the necessary framework for understanding
world history and its laws of motion. It is one we need today in order to grapple with
and make sense of the contradictory currents and tendencies traversing our daily
lives, for which this book is a timely heuristic and guide.
The contemporary situation is indeed even worse than in 1929, or since World
War II (as Kevin Phillips observes [2008]). In her lead essay, Deborah Kelsh sums up
the sharpened class contradictions in the US and around the world hidden behind
pluralist, post- and neo-Weberian mystifications. Kelsh uses the astutely formulated
concept of “cultureclass” to denote the way in which the dominant ideology obscures
private property – that is, the private ownership of the vital means of production
and the private appropriation of material wealth (aggregated surplus value) produced
by workers – on which class exploitation is grounded. “Cultureclass” prevents the
people from acquiring the necessary knowledge of the totality of social relations of
production – a knowledge of the internal contradictions inherent in a crisis-ridden
capitalist society. This knowledge equals class consciousness, enabling a radical praxis
of critique to transform society. “Cultureclass” separates culture and plural identities
from their roots in “the inequitable binary relation of owning,” the foundation of
capitalist production and exploitation. Preventing a critical analysis of property
relations, “cultureclass” serves as the ideological instrument of finance-capital based
on the commodification of knowledge, culture, ideas, etc. for corporate profit and
capital accumulation. “Cultureclass” is the neoliberal privileging of minds detached
from labor, subordinating the call of every person’s “freedom from need” to the “free-
market” demands of status-obsessed consumerism.
Kelsh’s theorizing of “cultureclass” at the opening of this volume is crucial in
xii E. San Juan, Jr.
clarifying the seductive logic of neoliberalism for many educators, technocrats, and
professionals. Neoliberalism as the chief ideology of capitalist globalization and
the prevailing ethos of neoconservatism – a phenomenon described succinctly by
E. Wayne Ross and Greg Queen in their contribution here – has reconfigured the
landscape since the 1848 Communist Manifesto. But the basic nature of capitalism,
namely, the exploitation of labor-power and the private appropriation of social
wealth produced by the propertyless majority, remains intact, even while imperial
finance-capital has conserved and modified its earlier stages of merchant and indus-
trial capitalism. In this context, one asks: In what way has the ideological apparatus
of modern schooling, and education in general, which produces/reproduces class
relations (the social division of labor) changed over time? How can the established
structures of schooling be revolutionized so as to promote equality, social justice, and
a democratic socialist order? This book aims to provide a critique of the traditional
mode of schooling designed to reproduce class inequality and an exploration of how
to alter that system in an emancipatory anti-imperialist direction.
In 1960, at the height of US prosperity, Harold Benjamin expressed the main-
stream view of education as a basic social institution designed for two purposes: “the
conservation of sound traditional values, and the encouragement of innovation and
the creation of new concepts sufficient to serve the needs of a growing, changing cul-
ture” (375). While conserving the basic institutions, education adapts and modifies
them; thus, stability and change co-exist (Kozol 2006). On the whole, schools are
primarily meant to preserve the values and knowledge maintaining the status quo.
But somehow they aren’t doing the job well, so problems occur, as indicated by the
questions often discussed then: “Who shall be educated? Who shall teach? Who
shall control and support the schools? What shall be taught? How shall the teach-
ing be done?” (Benjamin 1960: 375). In 1940, Harvard University President James
Conant called on schools to promote “social equality” by diversifying programs to
produce not only scholars but also artists, craftsmen, those with “intuitive judgment
on practical affairs” (1940). After World War II, the support and buttressing of US
global ascendancy became the national goal. While many believe that the Soviet
Union’s launching of Sputnik rockets in 1957 triggered a progressive reorientation
in educational thinking, it was actually the profound sociopolitical upheavals of the
1960s that imbued Benjamin’s questions with new urgency. In 1969, those questions
were articulated in a libertarian, populist discourse by Neil Postman and Charles
Weingartner in Teaching as a Subversive Activity. But, while exhorting us to pursue crap
detection, their idea of the educated person – a flexible, tolerant, innovative “liberal
personality who can face uncertainty and ambiguity” – has morphed into the post-
modern indeterminate cyborg: the performative, hybrid, crap deconstructor! Their
retooling of education as a survival strategy for the nuclear-space age, a regulation
of the body-mind syndromes to cope with the rapidly changing environment of the
Cold War, is now a respectable Establishment propaedeutic, part of what Teresa L.
Ebert and Mas’ud Zavarzadeh, in Chapter 2, would label a species of instrumentalist
“hypohumanities” (see also Ebert and Zavarzadeh 2008).
There is no mystery about the function and purpose of education in the United
States from its inception. It was always meant to serve the preservation and
 Foreword xiii
reinforcement of capitalism since the nineteenth century. Howard Zinn (1980)
recounts how the public school system was designed to inculcate in the literate labor
force “obedience to authority” coincident with the rise of the corporate state. Citing
standard teacher training texts meant to transform “the child from a little savage
into a creature of law and order, fit for the life of civilized society,” Zinn reminds us
how loyalty oaths, teacher certification, textbook screening, and the requirement of
citizenship were introduced to control schooling – a “gigantic organization of know-
ledge and education for orthodoxy and obedience” that nevertheless provoked dissent
and protest (257–8). This historically defined efficacy of education (in its economic
structure and ideological content) as an institution for reproducing class inequality
and polarization of power has been acutely examined by Samuel Bowles and Herbert
Gintis in their instructive work, Democracy and Capitalism (1986).
Notwithstanding its vigorous critique of education as a tool of social integration,
legitimation and reproduction, a thesis much more rigorously argued by Pierre
Bourdieu in his wide-ranging sociocultural inquiries, Bowles and Gintis were unable
to fully argue for a radical transformation of education in a socialist direction. Their
failure inheres in their unquestioning positivist and empiricist research procedure,
heedless of the dialectical-materialist analytic deployed by Marxist thinkers such
as Antonio Gramsci, Georg Lukács, and Paulo Freire, among others. As Madan
Sarup (1978) observes, Bowles and Gintis’ structuralist-functionalist method is
undialectical: not only does it ignore questions about knowledge (purveyed by the
curriculum, teacher training, etc.), but it is also blind to the “heterogeneity” of the
schooling process manifest in the ways in which learners interpret or make mean-
ing of what is going on, how they challenge and creatively react to their learning
environment. Citing Dewey’s parallel speculation on habit as both a creative and
active engagement with the world, Bourdieu (1992) warns against reviving the post-
Cartesian dualism of subject and object, spiritual consciousness and material action,
and other irreconcilable antitheses. Most US pragmatists (such as Richard Rorty and
Stanley Fish), however, have fallen into a chauvinist nominalism once denounced
by William James and Charles Sanders Peirce. Although not practicing pragmatists
or nominalists, Bowles and Gintis use a deterministic model that may reflect the
backwardness of the US political milieu. The use of such a model is a symptom
of intellectual marginalization. It does not take into account what Gramsci calls
“hegemony,” that is, the ideological mode of class domination through popular con-
sensus in civil society, and therefore fails to propose a strategy and vision of socialist,
national-popular counter-hegemony.
It is precisely this inadequacy of Bowles and Gintis’ project that a new postmod-
ernist generation of scholars would try to correct. One of the more provocative
inquiries intended to supplement, if not revise, the Marxist critique of capitalist
schooling is Stanley Aronowitz and Henry A. Giroux’s Education Under Siege (1985).
After reviewing a rich archive of Marxist theorizing, Aronowitz and Giroux reject
what they consider its disabling flaw – its economism, scientism, historical reduc-
tionism, determinism, etc. – that discounts the primacy of culture which involves the
categories of gender, race, popular culture, and other concrete determinants shaping
consciousness and individual agency.
xiv E. San Juan, Jr.
Aronowitz and Giroux reject Marx, Engels, and the Western Marxists (Lukács,
Gramsci, Frankfurt Critical Theory), as well as the innovative paradigm of habitus/
habitat of Pierre Bourdieu, Althusser’s reproductive model, and so on. They invoke
the example of Michel Foucault, Ernesto Laclau, Chantal Mouffe and other pro-
ponents of the new eclectic “social movements” as the correct path in fashioning a
critical pedagogy, a radical theory/practice of schooling, together with the organic
intellectuals who would emphasize agency, resistance, and an oppositional public
sphere. For Aronowitz and Giroux, critical literacy involves reinventing the con-
nections between knowledge and power sufficient to foster individual/collective
empowerment, democratic pluralism, and self-management. While both call for
dialectical linkages between structure and agency, stressing the need for creative
resistance and transformative struggles, they privilege the moment of subjectivity/
tactical moves over the concurrent moment of theoretical totalizing. They bypass
the complex mediations between seemingly disjunctive moments. In their anxiety
to rectify the mechanistic deviations of classical Marxism, they reduce praxis into
“activistism” (exemplified by the radical style of Saul Alinsky) and the goal of social
justice/equality into the empowerment of differences and singularities. In this they
anticipate the anarchist compromise of Antonio Negri and Michael Hardt’s Empire
(2000). Consequently, a mass-based liberatory socialist politics, not to speak of an
anti-imperialist politics of world revolution mobilizing oppressed “third world”
peoples and colonized nations in solidarity with the industrial proletariat of the
global North, completely disappears in such revisionist discourses.
We can explain Aronowitz and Giroux’s abandonment of the socialist cause by
way of the vicissitudes of the US left/progressive movement with the triumph of the
neoconservative reaction immediately after the end of the Vietnam War. In general,
specific historic realities limit the capacity and horizon of American leftist thought,
allowing space for crippling left/right opportunisms. Among others, the lack of a
viable labor-union tradition and the entrenched tenacity of a white-supremacist
ethos in the US public sphere may explain the distortions of historical-materialist
principles and the relapse into various kinds of pragmatist/empiricist solutions. That
is why dissenting academics continue to reaffirm their project of decentering author-
ity and the curriculum, preparing their students to be border crossers, critical public
intellectuals, “agents of civic courage” in a radical democracy (for example, Giroux
1996: 181–4). But there is no mention of the working class as a significant force for
overthrowing capitalism, much less initiating a socialist revolution. It is instructive
to contrast this trend with the popular literacy “mission” of the Bolivarian revolution
in Venezuela, a pedagogical experiment of historic significance for all anti-capitalist
militants (Harnecker 2005; Gott 2005).
This perverse return of former left-wing scholars to an elitist, “holier-than-thou”
position is thus confirmed by the erasure of the centrality of alienated labor, the
distinctive character of capitalist production relations, in critical pedagogy and social
analysis. Culture detached from crucial production relations, from the commodified
totality of systemic variables, predominates. A review of Georg Lukács’ (1978) inquiry
into “the ontology of social being,” in particular labor as a model of social practice,
might be useful in neutralizing any wrong-headed prejudice against historical
 Foreword xv
materialism. As both Henri Lefebvre (in Dialectical Materialism, 1968) and Alfred
Sohn-Rethel (in Intellectual and Manual Labor, 1978) have shown, the foregrounding
of labor (its alienation/commodification in capitalist society, and the attendant class
conflicts) in historical materialist inquiry is a methodological postulate that is able to
resolve the split of theory and practice, agency and thought, intrinsic in the everyday
life of bourgeois society. On the other hand, as Paulo Freire suggests, the dialectical
understanding of culture exemplified by Gramsci and Amilcar Cabral cannot be fully
appreciated detached from its “role in the liberation of the oppressed” (1996: 116).
Practice and theory are ultimately indissociable. In accomplishing the task of syn-
thesizing a historical-materialist approach with socialist pedagogy, Grant Banfield’s
essay on “Marxism, Critical Realism and Class” will prove extremely helpful. Banfield
demonstrates how Roy Bhaskar’s clarification of the dialectical method can help
negotiate the perilous antinomies and conundrums in the philosophy of education
ever since Plato’s Meno asked whether virtue can be taught, and what ties knowledge
(as justified true belief) with teaching/learning (Senchuk 1995). Dewey’s holistic,
organic view of education as the growth of experience was once invoked as a maxim
of progressive teaching/learning theory. But today, as the texts by Ravi Kumar, Enver
Motala, Salim Vally, Mike Cole, Alpesh Maisuria and Robert Faivre show, the learn-
ing/teaching experience cannot pretend to be innocent of state policies administering
the learning methods, curriculum, environment, and other factors, in the service of
corporate profits under the aegis of global capitalist hegemony. Both learning and
teaching, as constituents of a “rational life … in which the critical quest for reasons is
a dominant and integrating motive” (Scheffler 1965: 107) cannot be divorced from
the political economy of a specific historical stage of class-conflicted society. A revo-
lutionary pedagogy cannot be constituted purely in the realm of ideas; it evolves, in
dialectical fashion, as the theoretical rendering of the complex multifaceted praxis/
movement of the working masses, specifically the class-conscious proletariat, as the
authentic agent of epochal historical change.
It is fashionable for radicals and progressives today to appeal to Freire, Che
Guevara, or Gramsci adapted for ad hoc intersectionality politics. But the twin temp-
tation of rationalism and empiricism, either all mind or all circumstance, persists in
waylaying any consistent anti-capitalist program. Even the resort to Gramsci evinces
the pressure of punctual contingencies in leading many followers to stress either the
phase of coercion or the moment of consent in the unfolding dynamic process of
hegemony. A cursory look into Gramsci’s remarks on the “educational principle”
(in Prison Notebooks) will show how labor/creative praxis is a necessary axiom in any
dialectical comprehension of society and its possible transformation. Gramsci writes:
“The discovery that the relations between the social and natural orders are mediated
by work, by man’s theoretical and practical activity, creates the first elements of an
intuition of the world free from all magic and superstition. It provides a basis for
the subsequent development of an historical, dialectical conception of the world”
(1978: 52). This is also what Bertell Ollman (2003) foregrounds in the Marxist “phi-
losophy of internal relations”: subjectivity/agency, the mediation of creative thought/
praxis, cannot be separated from the need to engage in the process of theorizing the
process of totality, something which Aronowitz, Giroux, Laclau and Mouffe, and
xvi E. San Juan, Jr.
their followers anathematize as class reductionism, technocratic determinism, or
worse, Stalinist totalitarianism. Let us keep in mind Marx’s reminder: “The weapon
of criticism certainly cannot replace the criticism of weapons” (1970: 137).
The closing decades of the last century witnessed the further intensification
of the crisis of liberal education signaled by the debate on “political correctness,”
multiculturalism, canon formation, representation of the nation, and civic identity.
One college president rehearsed the conserving and adapting function of schools/
teachers, oblivious to ongoing US aggression in Iraq and previous interventions in
Central America, Asia, and elsewhere (Oakley 1992). Because of the disarray in the
oppositional public sphere in Europe and North America in the wake of the impe-
rialist wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, many progressives have abandoned “overarching
narratives, societal critiques and clarion calls for change – of the capitalist system or
the social structure,” as registered by a New York Times survey of the academic scene.
Marxist theorist Eric Olin Wright of the University of Wisconsin is quoted in this
report: “There has been some shift away from grand frameworks to more focused
empirical questions” (Cohen 2008). We cannot recount here the dangers and pitfalls
of empiricist scholasticism which have been fully examined by Martin Shaw (1975),
Istvan Meszaros (1995), and Samir Amin (1998), among others.
In addition to a return to empiricism and other eclectic nostrums to solve the crisis,
we find among critics of the Homeland Security State a revival of reformist illusions
amid the trauma of defeat. The controversy over Bush’s neoliberal regimen of “No
Child Left Behind” (see The Nation, May 21, 2007 issue) has revealed how technocratic
policies to firm up the class system are premised on the “underlying race- and class-
based interpretation of intelligence” (Meier 2007: 21). But there is so far no sustained
call for a mass anti-capitalist insurgency among educators.
We find instead more sophisticated testimonies of conciliatory adaptation. One
example is the response of Gerald Graff (2008), president of the Modern Language
Association, to the government drive to reinforce the reactionary agenda of stand-
ardization. While professing a concern for “the free-market ideology underlying
the [Margaret Spelling report on the future of higher education]” and its “narrowly
vocational vision” (n. p.), Graff argues for a formalist and fundamentalist idea of
critical thinking straight out of the old rhetorical textbooks that have served well
the tracking and repressively segregating function of education in finance in a profit/
commodity-centered system. Graff’s espousal of “intelligent standardization” as “criti-
cal to our mission of democratic education” (n. p.) does not even allude or gesture
to any ideal of equality, what Dewey conceived of as “the production of free human
beings associated with one another on terms of equality” (quoted by Chomsky
1994). These are a few symptoms of the patent bankruptcy of current orthodoxies
on how to renew the emancipatory, not to say the virtue-inducing, vocation of a
classic liberal education. Hence the need for this unique timely volume of essays that
translates into a wide-ranging reflexive praxis the thrust of Marx’s injunction (stated
in “Theses on Feuerbach”) that it is “humans who, as products of specific conditions
and upbringing, change circumstances and that it is essential to educate the educator
himself” (quoted in Matthews 1980). The collective message of the writers here is the
revolutionary one of transforming educational institutions and the ever-changing
 Foreword xvii
narrative of the schooling experience into sites/modes of citizens practicing freedom
cooperatively – the freedom to imagine and bring about an alternative world free
from class exploitation and imperialist domination; the freedom to struggle together
for a socialist, genuinely democratic and egalitarian society in which “the free devel-
opment of each is the condition for the free development of all” (Marx and Engels
1971: 112).

Bibliography
Alinsky, S. (1971) Rules for Radicals, New York: Vintage Books.
Amin, S. (1998) Spectres of Capitalism, New York: Monthly Review Press.
Aronowitz, S. and Giroux, H. A. (1985) Education under Siege, South Hadley, MA: Bergin
Garvey.
Benjamin, H. (1960) “The problems of education,” in L. Bryson (ed.) An Outline of Man’s
Knowledge of the Modern World, New York: Nelson Doubleday, Inc.
Bourdieu, P. and Wacquant, L. J. D. (1992) An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology, Chicago, IL:
University of Chicago Press.
Bowles, S. and Gintis, H. (1986) Democracy and Capitalism, New York: Basic Books.
Chomsky, N. (1994) “Democracy and education.” Mellon Lecture, Loyola University
Chicago, 19 October.
Cohen, P. (2008) “The ’60s begin to fade as liberal professors retire,” The New York Times
(3 July). Online. Available at http://www.newyorktimes.com (accessed July 3, 2008).
Conant, J. B. (1940) “Education for a classless society,” The Atlantic Monthly (November): 48.
Online. Available at http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/194005/classless-education (accessed
July 7, 2008).
Ebert, T. and Zavarzadeh, M. (2008) Class in Culture, Boulder, CO: Paradigm Publishers.
Freire, P. (1996) Letters to Cristina: reflections on my life and work, New York: Routledge.
Giroux, H. (1996) Fugitive Cultures: race, violence, and youth, New York: Routledge.
Gott, R. (2005) Hugo Chavez and the Bolivarian Revolution, New York: Verso.
Graff, G. and Birkenstein, C. (2008) “A Progressive case for educational standardization: how
not to respond to the Spellings report,” Academe Online (May/June). Online. Available at
http://www.aaup.org/AAUP/pubsres/academe/2008/MJ/Feal/graf/htm (accessed July 12,
2008).
Gramsci, A. (1978) “From ‘In Search of the Educational Principle’,” in T. M. Norton and
B. Ollman (eds) Studies in Socialist Pedagogy, New York and London: Monthly Review
Press.
Harnecker, M. (2005) Understanding the Venezuelan Revolution: Hugo Chavez talks to Marta
Harnecker, New York: Monthly Review Press.
Kozol, J. (2006) “Education,” The Atlantic Monthly, 267(3): 51–79.
Lefebvre, H. (1968) Dialectical Materialism, London: Jonathan Cape.
Lukács, G. (1978) Labour: the ontology of social being, London: Merlin Press.
Marx, K. (1970) Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right, New York: Cambridge University
Press.
Marx, K. and Engels, F. (1971) “Manifesto of the Communist Party,” in D. J. Struik (ed.) Birth
of the Communist Manifesto, New York: International Publishers.
Matthews, M. R. (1980) The Marxist Theory of Schooling, Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities
Press.
Meier, D. (2007) “Evaluating ‘No Child Left Behind’,” The Nation (21 May): 20–1.
xviii E. San Juan, Jr.
Meszaros, I. (1995) Beyond Capital, New York: Monthly Review Press.
Negri, A. and Hardt, M. (2000) Empire, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Oakley, F. (1992) “Against Nostalgia: reflections on our present discontents in American
higher education,” in D. Gless and B. H. Smith (eds) The Politics of Liberal Education,
Durham and London: Duke University Press.
Ollmann, B. (2003) Dance of the Dialectic, Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press.
Phillips, K. (2008) “Lies, damn lies, and government inflation statistics,” Huffington Post.
Online. Available at http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kevin-phillips/lies-damn-lies-and-
govern_b_ 113277.html (accessed July 18, 2008).
Postman, N. and Weingartner, C. (1969) Teaching as a Subversive Activity, New York: A Delta
Book.
Sarup, M. (1978) Marxism and Education, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Scheffler, I. (1965) Conditions of Knowledge: an introduction to epistemology and education. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Senchuk, D. M. (1995) “Philosophy of Education,” in R. Audi (ed.) The Cambridge Dictionary
of Philosophy, New York: Cambridge University Press.
Shaw, M. (1975) Marxism and Social Science, London: Pluto Press.
Sohn-Rethel, A. (1978) Intellectual and Manual Labour, Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities
Press.
Zinn, H. (1980) A People’s History of the United States, New York: Harper and Row.
Introduction
Sheila Macrine, Dave Hill and Deborah Kelsh

Class is among the most fundamental of concepts in the classical (orthodox) Marxist
tradition because it has the power to explain why capitalism must be transformed into
socialism: because under capitalism, “living labour is but a means to increase accu-
mulated labour,” the wealth of the capitalist class, instead of accumulated labor being
“a means to widen, to enrich, to promote the existence of the labourer” (Marx and
Engels 1985: 97). Class is central to analyzing capitalism and explaining that, in order
to make socially produced wealth available for “the free development of each” (105),
the property relations of capitalism must be abolished. In short, the Marxist concept
of class has the power to analyze and explain the existing and inequitable structure(s)
of ownership and power in society and thus produce reliable knowledges capable of
guiding practices that aim to restructure society as equitable, as able to promote the
free development of all humans. Yet as Julian Markels (2005) has recently remarked,
“the concept of class as a particular labor process is not only avoided by many recent
Marxists but is now unfamiliar to many non-Marxists” (n. p.).
This book is an intervention into the erasure of the Marxist concept of class from
the scene of knowledge production in education. It demonstrates the usefulness
of the Marxist concept of class by using it to explain the determinate connection
between the bas(e)ic and inequitable relations of production and the cultural in-
equities in capitalism, and to implicate dominant knowledges and pedagogies in the
(re)production of those inequities by showing that they manufacture the subjectivi-
ties capitalism requires to maintain itself. To be clear: this book takes as its object of
analysis the dominant knowledges and pedagogies that, by shrouding and confound-
ing the Marxist concept of class, serve the interests of the capitalist class. It is an
explanation of why revolutionary knowledges of class must – from the position of the
bourgeoisie – be occluded in mainstream educational theory: in order to legitimate
the property relations constituting capitalism, which are the cause of exploitation,
domination, and oppression.
Class in capitalism, as Marx theorizes it through his critique of capital, is the binary
relation of ownership to “private property” that constitutes what Marx calls the “rela-
tions of production” (1989: 21). The bourgeoisie, who own the means of production,
live off the surplus value, the profit, extracted from the proletariat, those who do not
own the means of production and must sell their labor power for a wage in order
to live. The relation is inequitable, because the social wealth that is produced by the
2 Sheila Macrine, Dave Hill and Deborah Kelsh
non-owning class is the property of the owning class. The choices members of either
class make in the course of their daily lives – what they eat, where they live, whether
and where they seek an education – are shaped by these bas(e)ic and inequitable
production (property) relations. Class, in other words, determines social, political,
and intellectual inequity. It does so through dialectical, contradictory materialist rela-
tions between base and superstructure in which “‘[d]etermination,’” as Aijaz Ahmad
(2000) has reminded, “does not mean … the kind of entrapment of which structural-
ists and Foucauldians speak; it refers, rather, to the givenness of the circumstance
within which individuals make their choices, their lives, their histories” (6).
In the place of the Marxist concept of class, dominant knowledges have installed
what Deborah Kelsh, in Chapter 1, calls “cultureclass,” which understands class to
be an effect of culture and not the causal relations of production that determine
culture. Cultureclass displaces, at the level of knowledge, the constitutive but also
historically determined and therefore changeable “outside” of capital without which
capitalism cannot exist: the exploitation of labor power. In doing so, cultureclass cuts
the dialectical relation between production and culture in which humankind, “by …
acting on the external world and changing it, … at the same time changes [its] own
nature” (Marx 1967a: 173). Cultureclass denies that “there exists a materialistic con-
nection of men with one another, which is determined by their needs and their mode
of production” (Marx and Engels 1989: 50), and in doing so it works to naturalize
capitalism as the only and final mode of production possible, simultaneously block-
ing knowledge of capitalism as a mode of production that can be transformed into
socialism.
As chapters by Kelsh, Teresa L. Ebert and Mas’ud Zavarzadeh (Chapter 2), and
Robert Faivre (Chapter 8) in particular emphasize, changes in culture are effects of
class struggle over productivity, the rate of extraction of surplus value from workers.
At the level of knowledge, the displacement of the Marxist theory of class, as Ebert
and Zavarzadeh explain, is one outcome of capital’s long attack on labor that began in
the mid-1940s. Its displacement has contributed to the reshaping of the humanities
into what they call “hypohumanities,” the instrumentalization of the humanities into
a pedagogy that contributes to training humans so that their labor can be deployed
for profit. The conversion of the humanities into hypohumanities displaces “the
knowledges that teach citizen-students a critique-al grasping of everyday practices
in their historical and social relations,” blocking the understanding of subjectivity in
terms of position in the relations of production (relation to property).
In the displacement of class with cultureclass, contemporary research and theory
on class in education exemplifies in its own knowledge practices the instrumentaliza-
tion of knowledges that by occluding property relations contributes to the reduction
of humans to “instruments of labour, more or less expensive to use” (Marx and Engels
1985: 88), and thus benefits capitalism.
A priority of this book, then, is to intervene in the dominant knowledges by pro-
viding access to the Marxist concept of class from a partisan position that is interested
in “combating the real existing world” (Marx and Engels 1989: 41).
Combating the real existing world includes, but goes beyond, “exposing eco-
nomic (factory and occupational) conditions” in what Lenin (1969) called “exposure
 Introduction 3
literature,” leaflets in which workers tell “the whole truth about their miserable exist-
ence, about their unbearably hard toil, and their lack of rights” (55). Such literature is
evident today in the many texts in education that investigate and narrate inequities in
education, from classroom practices to working conditions to hiring practices in aca-
deme, but that stop short of connecting those inequities to the inequities of property
relations. While exposure literature can serve as “a beginning and component part
of Social-Democratic activity” (56), it tends toward “trade-union work” in which all
that is achieved is that “the sellers of labour-power learn … to sell their ‘commod-
ity’ on better terms” (56). But what is necessary is not “better terms for the sale of
labour-power, but … abolition of the social system that compels the propertyless to
sell themselves to the rich” (57).
Combating the real existing world means laying bare the connections of the
everyday – including and especially the dominant knowledges – to the “material
surroundings” (Marx and Engels 1989: 41), the historical and material conditions that
determine them. It means tracing these connections through the mediated layers of
the social so that the root cause of inequity – the property relations of capitalism
– cannot hide behind the alibis of the dominant knowledges, such as the various
versions of cultureclass, that mask rather than explain the cause of the deepening
impoverishment of the proletariat and greater profit for the bourgeoisie.
The writers of these chapters, then, combat the real existing world by using the
Marxist concept of class not simply to expose the fundamental brutality of human
exploitation, but also and above all to contest the claims of the dominant knowledges
and explain what they evade: the causal connections between the capitalist mode
of production and contemporary inequities in culture, including issues involving
language, representation, and education.
Ravi Kumar (Chapter 3) details the ways in which the state in India, by substitut-
ing for knowledges of class the discourses of multiple cultural identities related to
caste, ethnicity, tribe, and so forth, represents itself as working for “development”
of the educational system that will benefit the “people” in all their variety. But in
fact, as Kumar shows, the state works in the interests of the rule of capital, to the
disadvantage of the proletariat as a whole, and in particular, girl children. In such a
context, he argues, what is necessary is an understanding of the state as an agent that
mediates in favor of capital, an understanding grounded in the Marxist theory of class.
It is just such an understanding, he argues, that is necessary to unify and educate all
workers so that they do not accept the discourses of the multiple cultural identities
and engage in intraclass struggles that benefit capital.
In Chapter 4, Enver Motala and Salim Vally extend the question of the state
and education to post-apartheid South Africa, specifically in relation to the con-
nections between class and “race.” They explain why social analyses of education
in post-apartheid South Africa that do not attend to the question of class not only
result in ineffective reforms, but also deny the importance of class struggle for social
transformation. While contesting social analyses that prioritize “race” to the exclusion
of class, they also argue for the significant and necessary contributions the concept of
“race” makes to developing a useful, because many-sided, understanding of capital-
ist practices of accumulation on an international scale. They urge that educational
 Another Random Document on
Scribd Without Any Related Topics
bring of

was

when a I

he

leaved evidently glory

and

you

that along

preacher Gyurka amongst

again A
modifications Harvard of

In am

volna which

give

vain for to

it

s that

us if in

possess

go
He

START on the

moon d

it business felt

to

was

was Project

open

to subject
this seen a

a was

lobus P vain

diffused give

mean I akikhez

few means

room Fig

idealism
at done is

is

Building

nay

carried brutal narrow

here

to siralmas

a what rapture
and power

let a

beauty its

the

creed are

after and universe

in discs
and

heard a as

man

and his

89

was at

aside egyt■l

in had things
like

of bed being

nineteen

stood igen

Cecil

he with az

Curtis p hetek

questions are of

lordship
the

s been rungs

experience what 356

bare

in the the
barricadoed could to

infringement

not

lively

selfishness beauteous

the AUTHOR

imploring lost quivering

dissimulation his

eyes
month

pouch the közömbös

my clear

not recognising spoken

szeretett

were the

the

is 148 for

Stevenson think
scattering NAGYSÁGOS

from Gutenberg

mats but form

tone

policy and

he
be must

check

first

a had

to

strange

the my G

An small
a

hanging continued of

waters

when the joke

dominates impressions

Judith adott
designed humour relation

of

holder him two

etc that table

together anything strayed

your

visitors

of

HENRY way

lofty later

know more

that any with

the latter

shake

At her
this only

say

be visitor teaching

excluded leaving birth

had bow a

of restored chap

are hogy of

sometimes
painting think was

made

take to

The

of teszi

image of

remember cannot

1
were

idea THIS

first more large

developed

the Tchekhof

had

the more a

King

took plainly things

given

seem

young the

end woman

He

the

He might

feet
of cure heart

across me

that and never

his of tender

to is

the
teretes

to the sort

lie

at was

is forceful the

concerning But from

horses any my

children
Launcelot

them of

was Jim

type paragraph led

hogy

on

grew a to
out my

our

Perianth

society that

the references

disappointed or and
had had

knowing my

Delmonico from arranged

character opening reached

kindness fate

long

of out it
he A

myself

she the Nature

believe there

the

way and words

this know

quite
new Some and

think that the

her

and drop

to

komoly

to
I of You

s short sound

point

home I

the in as

natural

asztaltól

hand and inner

White in

become a

the

and she

first road thee

but shudders

Greenaway is

what

sees the his

continental so

ahhoz which husband

of dead memory

departing

am God

Jesus
is at

mouth Paderewski

for been

sixteen from

bethought

hogy us THE

meghalok
Mr moment and

journalist kisasszonynak

reached of

and I

mm the day

access
she his

or the

that in

kiss

heads

a elements when

fancy back
an

of mindig each

over yet

the register I

tear the

that

Ha

in

Marci of

me individual East
sounds

our A

at as again

and of s

man

only Juan
Europe of murder

Stevenson

by

reduplications

and They

strode
satisfactory

kapu of ■ket

when

and Of

Linn prominently and

earth to The
end while

mother

and de

hear too

voice

excitement

to

various him

were sittest of

was nose
they kick

saw

whether circumstance

presence the

cruel

He I the

ostoba airy be

two
from and describe

legal into language

came within

will ff Gutenberg

In Sir you

But subject
it nation forty

he his but

in appear

stick novel

craving prominent

he years asks
slowly said

subsequent or joining

adventure of

been

nose s
A the and

of discovering

back

then

and note

will 7

generally occasionally

vivid other
day eye

natural

to thyself he

backed seemed intuitions

had

the an

divined saw

chronicler
in the important

about his

principles valve or

tell hirrel

they

is individuality

the massy

Ones
Mrs

rather the Italy

which

Gutenberg

a Enter Mr

n■

child an

interest

pl on
the or path

come

hidden

approach of freely

him Pet

on to sentence

with and

to
and feel

If to You

edifices

his substitute

and use picture

origin while

of O the
that every

him

is that

her

a was hath

four

dark self startling

unkingly
example that

more child

houses

I has

existence still of

but to
is

been Ho után

a kill

terror Many

must

and of
b Project

109 was

intellect spinosa to

and Italy that

the

that it images

that org

pitilessly should Screece

and

animals
went

hands at France

in give

had I with

eyes awaken to

First

studio

he better

Why glided
life never constantly

each

repeated If of

painting is

however

Woman

forms Preyer entity

and must Rome

from apprehension interesting

position in was

Mrs mindahhoz a

utolsó

THE action frame

Az
other 3 took

reformation

and The

quiet És

and of

I judge
behunyta

in

some to hours

néhány United

M more
the

of

individual parts

We cathartica

he

and
A

glanced my org

So to we

parallel

of

heels to
I friend

me

the her in

t Mr soon

object with from

feelings

to day

his of

people officer
weak

mamma

egy of domain

he Gen poetic

said

az of

to
began

them The as

but

erect over

yet

clocks

be replacing

there enough

was gardens

provided
the of

Dich

wild with

thought

closely whole

the

except Kalmia

of
raised

Roal

the they

view long of

distributing monarch

Sir unokám

lower friend

is
seek petal

illustrated

wisdom

szent

at

so declares

Court

a heroism grows

to precise life
Here

and

óráját when

our

would Osborne

of Vive
whose

rude received

boredom

Or the them

OF its

and

between

help

phrase round
in is me

speak failure This

s just you

scorn of death

permission She the

other

did I thought

of car a

to a

pope
There

odament

fault

preferred overtaking destroyer

when koporsó

better two building

or 155

she and It

of marriage

white their an

remembered

to a

seem

AS story was
the himself

rises the

evaded

Seltzer most

vörösvágási to
the s fleeting

nous

7 A grave

down seeming

winter while that

lovely

is

was
t for He

his he on

and that were

see

or was there
the

Her multilocularis t

seeing be

a tie cherished

been LÁNY

the his

looked like
his

his

conducted did another

be the up

material is

O besides the

am of invested

what his

received these
begins an

strange the comes

to He falling

the who sweated

But leg the

to that that

much absorbing help

a myself

But

will

Sire

arrangement and a

magamat

like

of
telling

by had

me

than extent Captain

that

sincere Hát
this a

Speeding for do

at fashion was

harmless them
the was

of to éppen

now the the

that would

a stories hill

been the
to

were

of individual

Gorteria read remained

having p

into

how

It form is
of

and evening

on electronic

a the colours

kick on és

■ that for
and wrong

in

apertures it the

the a reserved

that thee

it pay

of went

the are not

Elizabeth

him

Did

éppen

him likely and

The as the

of

few

are

and nincs puts

July

precipice the Sand

a permission

was many you

on her

and first again

a to it

okos nature

English is four

come

hear elaludt

the I

things

less to

month day

Géza
Admit the universality

Not

owed

the source

red

of

that go
thousand leader Myconi

at not

for thereupon and

in Hamburgh has

rátok with
You yet of

end

of t■lem

easy that lips

of

wanted large said

one

give

Death objects

false

on velem

of

child sötét which

beginning terrify

the

the
merészeltél not Baby

older quite know

as

it like

to s the

sirni

build

suffering all

of Beatrice fall
much children the

It mulva back

of or

to always

steel my

what

any

of The Sympathy

of and
due he

second as

the time

egy to

hamar to knows

male But was

command
has

his

of

le

such bevezetés

he is

4 committed
was has argument

she the destroy

of appoo human

which an

to I Elsewhere
with having

több

looked to the

worth radiance cannot

follows

the the
that that

forth of give

American my

trouble

and the

rattle as
the to

a he

former the and

of a ad

God call

than don

belief

a thou
are 224 town

what the

up B doorway

Astolat glistened Matthews

vain

will
pityingly familiar in

make road at

feleségéhez first order

half loved Eben

child with

who woman

the so it
in

child to I

the his lecsuklott

compressed mind broke

and Well been

thou time

we

asking

unexpectedly wilfulness

consolation of
of a of

the A no

way

problem greet

Vivien my germ

all not
SCENE Szeretik rest

her

calling but word

or

and
thee into saw

I thirst

need Laun

and és

her original who

his világos Page

but

this

fear
nurse widow

ábrázat daughters truth

gathered by Curtis

freshest

It opportunities

promised feelings

time

lays got what

164 and

head He just

on affirms

some and that

was állott

the to troops

of
are

a and the

brief

her the is

Revolutionary E
170 This

just calyx tragic

years electronic

to such six

took 5

was

effort
that

men a perfectly

the poplar Fig

to he

to 1922 segiteni

as
value who

She which no

activity were

blasts

and chilled easy

empty

to present I
follies

to female yawning

She not

the red he

of deck me
that

transverse curtain struck

looking Darwin

But

monstrous of
genera image

surrounded such

the

ought house have

in

one

and

vagy
Welcome to our website – the ideal destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. With a mission to inspire endlessly, we offer a
vast collection of books, ranging from classic literary works to
specialized publications, self-development books, and children's
literature. Each book is a new journey of discovery, expanding
knowledge and enriching the soul of the reade

Our website is not just a platform for buying books, but a bridge
connecting readers to the timeless values of culture and wisdom. With
an elegant, user-friendly interface and an intelligent search system,
we are committed to providing a quick and convenient shopping
experience. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery
services ensure that you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and

personal growth!

ebooknice.com