Workers need to develop class consciousness

Dear Editor, I find it interesting that so many speak of change and so many agree that often change has to come from within the individual as well as being influenced by the social circumstances within which we find ourselves. There is also a saying that as we act to change our objective conditions of existence those changes turn around and effect changes in ourselves. However, sometimes the circumstances change but our thinking does not. Very often our thinking goes against our own and our collective interest but we do not even recognise this.

We think in a particular way. We think within a particular system of logic, a specific paradigm. It allows us to arrive at certain conclusions which we accept to be true. The question is even though we think what we know is true, do we ever accept the possibility that our conclusions can be wrong, or how we view things could be wrong.

The usual approach is for us to accept to be true that which we accept to be true and reject that which opposes what we accept to be true. But how can we be so sure. Should we not in a controversial situation question what we know as we question that which opposes what we have accepted to be true? But we generally do not do that. So how can possible change take place? How can we be so absolutely sure that that which we know is the truth as opposed to that which confronts what we have accepted?

Do we ever ask ourselves where our ideas come from? Does our brain generate these ideas in the same manner as the liver produces bile? Is it simply coincidence that so many others think in the same manner? Or is it that we were socialized to think that way; that we were indoctrinated; that the basic paradigm within which we think, the system of logic that we utilise were a result of conditioning?

Have we ever examined who controls the major instruments for the dissemination of information? I believe if we did we would realise that 90 per cent of it is controlled by the one per cent who own and control most of the wealth.

So do we think they would have a reason for manipulating the information? Would they want to disseminate information that would encourage or facilitate our ability to question the present status quo? Or would they disseminate information to make us feel that the way it is, is the only way it can be or should be. Would they want to disseminate information that would demonise any possible alternatives in order to prevent cracks in the system that benefits them?

In this way we may have internalised a