The Role of Revolution in the Liberation

The aim of this paper is to examine the liberation philosophy of Enrique Dussel\u27s view. In the first chapter, I investigate some cogent features of the philosophy of liberation. First I compare and contrast the difference between philosophy and specifically philosophy of liberation. Philosophy of liberation is not just sophistry on the level of ontology or a mere ideology; by means of ana-dialectical method, it ponders the concrete reality of the everyday life of human beings. It also stems from people of the periphery who must, by means of the praxis of liberation, reorganize the totality of the system. Praxis, as a most important feature in the liberatory project, has two aspects: not only does it transform the whole structure of totality in the political, economic, technological, and cultural fields but its ultimate aim is also to develop and reproduce human life and restore people\u27s lost dignity. Another feature of the philosophy of liberation, which is the essence of praxis, is proximity. It has the ability to eliminate the wrong division between people who are in the center of power and those who are in the periphery. Pedagogical activity is another feature of this philosophy. Intellectuals can raise the consciousness of the oppressed classes and revitalize their rich culture. In the second section I consider Dussel\u27s view of the legitimacy of the political system. According to Dussel\u27s view, when the system is unable to fulfill its purpose, development of life for all human beings, and also victimizes its members constantly, it can no longer be legitimate. Therefore, the communities of victims have the right to stand against this oppressive system. Finally, in the last section I approach the role of revolution in liberation. The main purpose of this chapter is to answer this question, under what conditions can revolution end in liberation? Enrique Dussel believes in revolution as a final, strategic instrument for the restoration of justice. On this point, I compare and contrast some of Dussel\u27s theory with Hannah Arendt\u27s. Most important, for true liberation, people in the periphery need to participate in a body politic through the public realm. It is only in this sphere that people through their words and actions can achieve freedom; otherwise one oppressive system will be replaced by another and will create new victims. In this thesis I will argue, contrary to Dussel, that the course of revolution, even as a last strategic instrument, in the field of liberation cannot lead to the path of liberation. For a successful liberatory project we need public realm, which is a place in which citizens, through their actions and speeches, can appear to each other and they can participate actively in political sphere