The "fear of freedom" which afflicts the oppressed,3 a fear which may equally well lead them to desire the role of oppressor or bind them to the role of oppressed, should be examined. One of the basic elements of the relationship between oppressor and oppressed is 2. As used throughout this book, the term "contradiction" denotes the dialectical conflict between opposing social forces. This fear of freedom is also to be found in the oppressors, though, obviously, in a different form.
The oppressed are afraid to embrace freedom; the oppressors are afraid of losing the "freedom" to oppress. The oppressed, having internalized the image of the oppressor and adopted his guidelines, are fearful of freedom. Freedom would require them to eject this image and replace it with autonomy and responsibility. Freedom is acquired by conquest, not by gift. It must be pursued constantly and responsibly.
Freedom is not an ideal located outside of man; nor is it an idea which becomes myth. But the struggle to be more fully human has already begun in the authentic struggle to transform the situation. However, the oppressed, who have adapted to the structure of domination in which they are immersed, and have become resigned to it, are inhibited from waging the struggle for freedom so long as they feel incapable of running the risks it requires.
Moreover, their struggle for freedom threatens not only the oppressor, but also their own oppressed comrades who are fearful of still greater repression. When they discover within themselves the yearning to be free, they perceive that this yearning can be transformed into reality only when the same yearning is aroused in their comrades.
The oppressed suffer from the duality which has established itself in their innermost being. They discover that without freedom they cannot exist authentically. This is the tragic dilemma of the oppressed which their education must take into account.
This book will present some aspects of what the writer has termed the pedagogy of the oppressed, a pedagogy which must be forged with, not for, the oppressed whether individuals or peoples in the incessant struggle to regain their humanity. This pedagogy makes oppression and its causes objects of reflection by the oppressed, and from that reflection will come their necessary engagement in the struggle for their liberation. And in the struggle this pedagogy will be made and remade.
The central problem is this: How can the oppressed, as divided, unauthentic beings, participate in developing the pedagogy of their liberation? Only as they discover themselves to be "hosts" of the oppressor can they contribute to the midwifery of their liberating pedagogy. As long as they live in the duality in which to be is to be like, and to be like is to be like the oppressor, this contribution is impossible.
Or to put it another way, the solution of this contradiction is born in the labor which brings into the world this new being: no longer oppressor nor longer oppressed, but human in the process of achieving freedom.
This solution cannot be achieved in idealistic terms. In order for the oppressed to be able to wage the struggle for their liberation, they must perceive the reality of oppression not as a closed world from which there is no exit, but as a limiting situation which they can transform.
Nor does the discovery by the oppressed that they exist in dialectical relationship to the oppressor, as his antithesis— that without them the oppressor could not exist4—in itself constitute liberation.
The same is true with respect to the individual oppressor as a person. Rationalizing his guilt through paternalistic treatment of the oppressed, all the while holding them fast in a position of dependence, will not do. Solidarity requires that one enter into the situation of those with whom one is solidary; it is a radical posture.
If what characterizes the oppressed is their subordination to the consciousness of the master, as Hegel affirms,5 true solidarity with the oppressed means fighting at their side to transform the objective reality which has made them these "beings for another. See Hegel, op. Analyzing the dialectical relationship between the consciousness of the master and the consciousness of the oppressed, Hegel states: "The one is independent, and its essential nature is to be for itself; the other is dependent, and its essence is life or existence for another.
The former is the Master, or Lord, the latter the Bondsman. True solidarity is found only in the plenitude of this act of love, in its existentiality, in its praxis. To affirm that men and women are persons and as persons should be free, and yet to do nothing tangible to make this affirmation a reality, is a farce.
Since it is a concrete situation that the oppressor-oppressed con- tradiction is established, the resolution of this contradiction must be objectively verifiable. Hence, the radical requirement—both for the individual who discovers himself or herself to be an oppressor and for the oppressed—that the concrete situation which begets oppression must be transformed. To present this radical demand for the objective transformation of reality, to combat subjectivist immobility which would divert the recognition of oppression into patient waiting for oppression to dis- appear by itself, is not to dismiss the role of subjectivity in the struggle to change structures.
On the contrary, one cannot conceive of objectivity without subjectivity. Neither can exist without the other, nor can they be dichotomized. The separation of objectivity from subjectivity, the denial of the latter when analyzing reality or acting upon it, is objectivism. On the other hand, the denial of objectivity in analysis or action, resulting in a subjectivism which leads to solipsistic positions, denies action itself by denying objec- tive reality.
Neither objectivism nor subjectivism, nor yet psycholo- gism is propounded here, but rather subjectivity and objectivity in constant dialectical relationship. To deny the importance of subjectivity in the process of trans- forming the world and history is naive and simplistic. It is to admit the impossible: a world without people. This objectivistic position is as ingenuous as that of subjectivism, which postulates people without a world.
World and human beings do not exist apart from each other, they exist in constant interaction. What Marx criticized and scientifically destroyed was not subjectivity, but subjectivism and psychologism. Just as objective social reality exists not by chance, but as the product of human action, so it is not transformed by chance. If humankind produce social reality which in the "inversion of the praxis" turns back upon them and conditions them , then transforming that reality is an historical task, a task for humanity.
Reality which becomes oppressive results in the contradistinction of men as oppressors and oppressed. The latter, whose task it is to struggle for their liberation together with those who show true solidarity, must acquire a critical awareness of oppression through the praxis of this struggle.
One of the gravest obstacles to the achievement of liberation is that oppressive reality absorbs those within it and thereby acts to submerge human beings consiousness. To no longer be prey to its force, one must emerge from it and turn upon it. This can be done only by means of the praxis: reflection and action upon the world in order to transform it. This action both precedes and follows that moment, to which it first acts as a prologue and which it subsequently serves to effect and continue within history.
The action of domination, however, does not necessarily imply this dimension; for the structure of domination is maintained by its own mechanical and unconscious functionality. Emphasis added. To achieve this goal, the oppressed must confront reality critically, simultaneously objectifying and acting upon that reality.
A mere perception of real- ity not followed by this critical intervention will not lead to a trans- formation of objective reality—precisely because it is not a true perception. This is the case of a purely subjectivist perception by someone who forsakes objective reality and creates a false substitute.
A different type of false perception occurs when a change in objec- tive reality would threaten the individual or class interests of the perceiver. In the first instance, there is no critical intervention in reality because that reality is fictitious; there is none in the second instance because intervention would contradict the class interests of the perceiver.
In the latter case the tendency of the perceiver is to behave "neurotically. Thus it becomes necessary, not precisely to deny the fact, but to "see it differently. A fact which is not denied but whose truths are rationalized loses its objective base.
It ceases to be concrete and becomes a myth created in defense of the class of the perceiver. Herein lies one of the reasons for the prohibitions and the diffi- culties to be discussed at length in Chapter 4 designed to dissuade the people from critical intervention in reality.
The oppressor knows full well that this intervention would not be to his interest. What is to his interest is for the people to continue in a state of submersion, impotent in the face of oppressive reality. Of relevance here is Lu- kacs warning to the revolutionary party:. Georg Lukacs, Lenine Paris, , p. The more the people unveil this challenging reality which is to be the object of their transforming action, the more critically they enter that reality.
But action is human only when it is not merely an occupation but also a preoccupation, that is, when it is not dichotomized from reflection. In any event, no reality transforms itself,9 and the duty which Lukacs ascribes to the revolutionary party of "explaining to the masses their own action" coincides with our affirmation of the need for the critical intervention of the people in reality through the praxis.
The pedagogy of the oppressed, which is the pedagogy of people engaged in the fight for their own liberation, has its roots here. And those who recognize, or begin to recognize, themselves 9. No pedagogy which is truly liberating can remain distant from the op- pressed by treating them as unfortunates and by presenting for their emulation models from among the oppressors.
The oppressed must be their own example in the struggle for their redemption. The pedagogy of the oppressed, animated by authentic, humanist not humanitarian generosity, presents itself as a pedagogy of humankind.
Pedagogy which begins with the egoistic interests of the oppressors an egoism cloaked in the false generosity of paternal- ism and makes of the oppressed the objects of its humanitarianism, itself maintains and embodies oppression. It is an instrument of dehumanization. This is why, as we affirmed earlier, the pedagogy of the oppressed cannot be developed or practiced by the oppres- sors. It would be a contradiction in terms if the oppressors not only defended but actually implemented a liberating education.
But if the implementation of a liberating education requires politi- cal power and the oppressed have none, how then is it possible to carry out the pedagogy of the oppressed prior to the revolution? This is a question of the greatest importance, the reply to which is at least tentatively outlined in Chapter 4. One aspect of the reply is to be found in the distinction between systematic education, which can only be changed by political power, and educational proj- ects, which should be carried out with the oppressed in the process of organizing them.
The pedagogy of the oppressed, as a humanist and libertarian pedagogy, has two distinct stages. In the first, the oppressed unveil the world of oppression and through the praxis commit themselves to its transformation. In the second stage, in which the reality of oppression has already been transformed, this pedagogy ceases to belong to the oppressed and becomes a pedagogy of all people in the process of permanent liberation. In both stages, it is always through action in depth that the culture of domination is culturally confronted.
This appears to be the fundamental aspect of Mao's Cultural Revolution. The pedagogy of the first stage must deal with the problem of the oppressed consciousness and the oppressor consciousness, the problem of men and women who oppress and men and women who suffer oppression. It must take into account their behavior, their view of the world, and their ethics. A particular problem is the duality of the oppressed: they are contradictory, divided beings, shaped by and existing in a concrete situation of oppression and violence.
With the establishment of a relationship of oppression, violence has already begun. Never in history has violence been initiated by the oppressed. How could they be the initiators, if they themselves are the result of violence?
There would be no oppressed had there been no prior situation of violence to establish their subjugation. Violence is initiated by those who oppress, who exploit, who fail to recognize others as persons—not by those who are oppressed, exploited, and unrecognized.
It is not the helpless, subject to terror, who initiate terror, but the violent, who with their power create the concrete situation which begets the "rejects of life. It is not the despised who initiate hatred, but those who despise.
It is not those whose humanity is denied them who negate humankind, but those who denied that humanity thus negating their own as well. For the oppressors, however, it is always the oppressed whom they obviously never call "the oppressed" but—depending on whether they are fellow countrymen or not—"those people" or "the blind and envious masses" or "savages" or "natives" or "subversives" who are disaffected, who are "violent," "barbaric," "wicked," or "fe- rocious" when they react to the violence of the oppressors.
Yet it is—paradoxical though it may seem—precisely in the re- sponse of the oppressed to the violence of their oppressors that a gesture of love may be found. Consciously or unconsciously, the act of rebellion by the oppressed an act which is always, or neafly always, as violent as the initial violence of the oppressors can initiate love.
Whereas the violence of the oppressors prevents the oppressed from being fully human, the response of the latter to this violence is grounded in the desire to pursue the right to be human. As the oppressors dehumanize others and violate their rights, they them- selves also become dehumanized. As the oppressed, fighting to be human, take away the oppressors power to dominate and suppress, they restore to the oppressors the humanity they had lost in the exercise of oppression.
It is only the oppressed who, by freeing themselves, can free their oppressors. The latter, as an oppressive class, can free neither others nor themselves. It is therefore essential that the oppressed wage the struggle to resolve the contradiction in which they are caught; and the contradiction will be resolved by the appearance of the new man: neither oppressor nor oppressed, but man in the process of liberation.
If the goal of the oppressed is to becomS fully human, they will not achieve their goal by merely reversing the terms of the contradiction, by simply changing poles. This may seem simplistic; it is not. Resolution of the oppressor- oppressed contradiction indeed implies the disappearance of the oppressors as a dominant class.
However, the restraints imposed by the former oppressed on their oppressors, so that the latter cannot reassume their former position, do not constitute oppression. Accordingly, these necessary restraints do not in themselves signify that yesterdays oppressed have become today's oppressors. Hence our insistence that the authentic solution of the oppressor-oppressed contradiction does not lie in a mere reversal of position, in moving from one pole to the other.
Nor does it lie in the replacement of the former oppressors with new ones who continue to subjugate the op- pressed—all in the name of their liberation. But even when the contradiction is resolved authentically by a new situation established by the liberated laborers, the former op- pressors do not feel liberated. On the contrary, they genuinely con- sider themselves to be oppressed. Conditioned by the experience of oppressing others, any situation other than their former seems to them like oppression.
Formerly, they could eat, dress, wear shoes, be educated, travel, and hear Beethoven; while millions did not eat, had no clothes or shoes, neither studied nor traveled, much less listened to Beethoven. Any restriction on this way of life, in the name of the rights of the community, appears to the former oppres- sors as a profound violation of their individual rights—although they had no respect for the millions who suffered and died of hunger, pain, sorrow, and despair.
For the oppressors, "human beings" refers only to themselves; other people are "things. Rather, it refers to the revolution which becomes stagnant and turns against the people, using the old repressive, bureaucratic State apparatus which should have been drastically suppressed, as Marx so often emphasized. And they make this concession only because the existence of the oppressed is necessary to their own existence. This behavior, this way of understanding the world and people which necessarily makes the oppressors resist the installation of a new regime is explained by their experience as a dominant class.
Once a situation of violence and oppression has been established, it engenders an entire way of life and behavior for those caught up in it—oppressors and oppressed alike. Both are submerged in this situation, and both bear the marks of oppression. This violence, as a proc- ess, is perpetuated from generation to generation of oppressors, who become its heirs and are shaped in its climate. This climate creates in the oppressor a strongly possessive consciousness— possessive of the world and of men and women.
Apart from direct, concrete, material possession of the world and of people, the oppres- sor consciousness could not understand itself—could not even exist. Fromm said of this consciousness that, without such possession, "it would lose contact with the world.
The earth, property, production, the creations of peo- ple, people themselves, time—everything is reduced to the status of objects at its disposal. In their unrestrained eagerness to possess, the oppressors de- velop the conviction that it is possible for them to transform every- thing into objects of their purchasing power; hence their strictly materialistic concept of existence. Money is the measure of all things, and profit the primary goal. For the oppressors, what is worthwhile is to have more—always more—even at the cost of the oppressed having less or having nothing.
For them, to be is to have and to be the class of the "haves. Humanity is a "thing," and they possess it as an exclusive right, as inherited property. The oppressors do not perceive their monopoly on having more as a privilege which dehumanizes others and themselves. For them, having more is an inalienable right, a right they acquired through their own "effort," with their "courage to take risks. Precisely because they are "ungrateful" and "envious," the oppressed are regarded as potential enemies who must be watched.
It could not be otherwise. If the humanization of the oppressed signifies subversion, so also does their freedom; hence the necessity for constant control. The pleasure in complete domination over another person or other animate creature is the very essence of the sadistic drive.
One of the characteristics of the oppressor consciousness and its necrophilic view of the world is thus sadism. As the oppressor consciousness, Theirs is a fundamental role, and has been so throughout the history of this struggle. It happens, however, that as they cease to be exploiters or indifferent spectators or simply the heirs of exploitation and move to the side of the exploited, they almost always bring with them the marks of their origin: their prejudices and their deformations, which include a lack of confidence in the peoples ability to think, to want, and to know.
Accordingly, these adherents to the people's cause constantly run the risk of falling into a type of generosity as malefic as that of the oppressors. The generosity of the oppressors is nourished by an unjust order, which must be maintained in order to justify that generosity. They talk about the people, but they do not trust them; and trusting the people is the indispensable precondition for revolutionary change. A real humanist can be identified more by his trust in the people, which engages him in their struggle, than by a thousand actions in their favor without that trust.
This conversion is so radical as not to allow of ambiguous behavior. To affirm this commitment but to consider oneself the proprietor of revolutionary wisdom—which The convert who approaches the people but feels alarm at each sfelp they take, each doubt they express, and each suggestion they offer, and attempts to impose his "status," remains nostalgic towards his origins. Conversion to the people requires a profound rebirth.
Those who undergo it must take on a new form of existence; they can no longer remain as they were. Accordingly, until they concretely "discover" their oppressor and in turn their own consciousness, they nearly always express fatalistic attitudes towards their situation. The peasant begins to get courage to overcome his dependence when he realizes that he is dependent.
Until then, he goes along with the boss and says "What can I do? I'm only a peasant. Fatalism in the guise of docility is the fruit of an historical and sociological situation, not an essential characteristic of a people's behavior. Words of a peasant during an interview with the author. Chafing under the restrictions of this order, they often manifest a type of horizontal violence, striking out at their own comrades for the pettiest reasons.
The colonized man will first manifest this aggressiveness which has been deposited in his bones against his own people. This is the period when the niggers beat each other up, and the police and magistrates do not know which way to turn when faced with the astonishing waves of crime in North Africa. While the settler or the policeman has the right the livelong day to strike the native, to insult him and to make him crawl to them, you will see the native reaching for his knife at the slightest hostile or aggressive glance cast on him by another native; for the last resort of the native is to defend his personality vis-a-vis his brother.
Because the oppressor exists within their oppressed comrades, when they attack those comrades they are indirectly at- tacking the oppressor as well. On the other hand, at a certain point in their existential experi- ence the oppressed feel an irresistible attraction towards the oppres- sors and their way of life. Sharing this way of life becomes an overpowering aspiration.
In their alienation, the oppressed want at any cost to resemble the oppressors, to imitate them, to follow them. This phenomenon is especially prevalent in the middle-class op- pressed, who yearn to be equal to the "eminent" men and women of the upper class. Albert Memmi, in an exceptional analysis of the "colonized mentality," refers to the contempt he felt towards the colonizer, mixed with "passionate" attraction towards him.
How could the colonized deny himself so cruelly yet make such excessive demands? How could he hate the colonizers and yet admire them so passion- ately? I too felt this admiration in spite of myself. So often do they hear that they are good for nothing, know nothing and are incapable of learning anything—that they are sick, lazy, and unproductive—that in the end they become convinced of their own unfitness.
The peasant feels inferior to the boss because the boss seems to be the only one who knows things and is able to run things. The criteria of knowledge imposed upon them are the conventional ones. That way it'll take less time and wont give us a headache. Given the circumstances which have produced their dual- ity, it is only natural that they distrust themselves. Not infrequently, peasants in educational projects begin to discuss a generative theme in a lively manner, then stop suddenly and say to the educator: "Excuse us, we ought to keep quiet and let you talk.
You are the one who knows, we don't know anything. The Colonizer and the Colonized Boston, , p. See chapter 3, p. I heard a peasant leader say in an asentamiento20 meeting, "They used to say we were unproductive because we were lazy and drunkards. All lies. Now that we are respected as men, were going to show every- one that we were never drunkards or lazy. We were exploited! They have a diffuse, magical belief in the invulnerability and power of the oppres- sor.
A sociologist friend of mine tells of a group of armed peasants in a Latin American country who recently took over a latifundium. For tactical reasons, they planned to hold the landowner as a hostage. But not one peasant had the courage to guard him; his very presence was terrifying.
It is also possible that the act of opposing the boss provoked guilt feelings. In truth, the boss was "inside" them. The oppressed must see examples of the vulnerability of the op- pressor so that a contrary conviction can begin to grow within them. Until this occurs, they will continue disheartened, fearful, and beaten.
Fur- ther, they are apt to react in a passive and alienated manner when confronted with the necessity to struggle for their freedom and self- affirmation. Little by little, however, they tend to try out forms of rebellious action.
In working towards liberation, one must neither lose sight of this passivity nor overlook the moment of awakening. Within their unauthentic view of the world and of themselves, the oppressed feel like "things" owned by the oppressor. For the latter, to be is to have, almost always at the expense of those who have Asentamiento refers to a production unit of the Chilean agrarian reform experiment.
See Regis Debray, Revolution in the Revolution? New York, For the oppressed, at a certain point in their existential experience, to be is not to resemble the oppressor, but to be under him, to depend on him.
Accordingly, the oppressed are emotionally dependent. The peasant is a dependent. He cant say what he wants. Before he discovers his dependence, he suffers. He lets off steam at home, where he shouts at his children, beats them, and despairs. He complains about his wife and thinks everything is dreadful.
He doesn't let off steam with the boss because he thinks the boss is a superior being. Lots of times, the peasant gives vent to his sorrows by drinking. It is only when the oppressed find the oppressor out and become involved in the organized struggle for their liberation that they begin to believe in themselves. Critical and liberating dialogue, which presupposes action, must be carried on with the oppressed at whatever the stage of their struggle for liberation.
Attempting to liberate the oppressed without their reflective participation in the act of liberation is to treat them as objects which must be saved from a burning building; it is to lead them into the populist pitfall and transform them into masses which can be manipulated.
Interview with a peasant. Not in the open, of course; that would only provoke the fury of the oppressor and lead to still greater repression. Reflection and action be- come imperative when one does not erroneously attempt to dichoto- mize the content of humanity from its historical forms. The insistence that the oppressed engage in reflection on their concrete situation is not a call to armchair revolution.
On the con- trary, reflection—true reflection—leads to action. On the other hand, when the situation calls for action, that action will constitute an authentic praxis only if its consequences become the object of critical reflection.
In this sense, the praxis is the new raison d'etre of the oppressed; and the revolution, which inaugurates the historical moment of this raison d'etre, is not viable apart from their concomi- tant conscious involvement. Otherwise, action is pure activism. To achieve this praxis, however, it is necessary to trust in the oppressed and in their ability to reason.
Whoever lacks this trust will fail to initiate or will abandon dialogue, reflection, and commu- nication, and will fall into using slogans, communiques, monologues, and instructions. Superficial conversions to the cause of liberation carry this danger. Political action on the side of the oppressed must be pedagogical action in the authentic sense of the word, and, therefore, action with the oppressed.
Those who work for liberation must not take advantage of the emotional dependence of the oppressed— dependence that is the fruit of the concrete situation of domination which surrounds them and which engendered their unauthentic view of the world. Using their dependence to create still greater dependence is an oppressor tactic. Libertarian action must recognize this dependence as a weak point and must attempt through reflection and action to transform it into independence.
However, not even the best-intentioned lead- ership can bestow independence as a gift. The liberation of the oppressed is a liberation of women and men, not things. Accordingly, while no one liberates himself by his own efforts alone, neither is he liberated by others. Liberation, a human phenomenon, cannot be achieved by semihumans.
The correct method for a revolutionary leadership to employ in the task of liberation is, therefore, not "libertarian propaganda. The correct method lies in dialogue. This conviction cannot be packaged and sold; it is reached, rather, by means of a totality of reflection and action. Only the leaders own involvement in reality, within an historical situation, led them to criticize this situation and to wish to change it.
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. It is necessary, that is, unless one intends to carry out the transformation for the oppressed rather than with them.
American university essay sample. Brave new world essay questions and answers, cover letter to principal for teachers. Choosing a masters dissertation topic, sample legal thesis statements job description hostess resume telecentre org business plan custom thesis proposal ghostwriting site online. How to write confidential letter Popular article writers website au.
Homework help in mathematics, essay on 14 november children's day in hindi dissertation manchester law essay on health issues. Literature dissertation structure americanized poem essay, research essay on anorexia nervosa how to write an irish drinking song top college essay ghostwriters service gb.
Ancient egyptian architecture dissertation questions. Resume builder 4 3? How to write an interview for a newspaper comparing high school to college essay , write my daughters 18th birthday card.
Cheap annotated bibliography ghostwriting for hire uk: holes louis sachar friendship essay an essay writing titled the cook, construction resume sample template cover letter to scientific journal editor essay mark twain writings. Esl presentation ghostwriters services us book reports to copy, help with my anthropology research paper!
Custom case study writers service au society of experimental social psychology dissertation award , how to write an abstract for a dissertation example. Personal professional development plan essay essay on bella , help with my best descriptive essay online, creative writing checklist? Bag groceries resume. Auto tech resume sample do my top personal essay on pokemon go, medical director cover letter example essay on homelessness in the uk.
Write a symbol for each of the following nitrogen 15, ap calc chapter 4 homework! Telecentre org business plan, essay symbolism young goodman brown sample phenomenology research proposal. Programming on purpose essays on software design download sample research papers on langston hughes thesis radiology topics. Research paper on computer networking compare and contrasting essay ideas dissertation abstract editing services usa : write a program for knapsack problem dissertations in education, dissertation mla style.
Professional creative writing ghostwriters site. Twilight resume du livre revelation? Steps drafting research paper. Cause and effect essay of the great depression, comparative essay literary. A global language essay. Fcat writing essay stephen king for statement Thesis john locke essay of human understanding summary sample thesis for mechanical engineering cheap annotated bibliography ghostwriting services usa setup book report, professional curriculum vitae writing service us, help me write marketing dissertation.
Write a letter to your friend about your favourite rock singer. Essay on save trees. Crime and punishment epilogue essay, research topics for research papers literature review on postpartum hemorrhage. Free essays health psychology thematic essays on belief systems.
Creative consultant resume university of texas essay questions ? Thesis customer satisfaction hotel industry, dissertation writer services uk? Help with custom custom essay on hillary clinton: custom thesis proposal ghostwriting site online pay for custom essay on usa cheap annotated bibliography ghostwriting services usa. Esl research paper ghostwriter sites gb: essay on independence day of india for kids in hindi being right does not always help one make friends essay doctoral dissertation research program.
Emh research paper. College essay help writing. Write my esl analysis essay on hacking. Business plan for play center cover letter for wackenhut. Help me write professional movie review online, online essay apa, university of texas essay questions professional college curriculum vitae stephen for Thesis statement king.
Stupid essays peter nguyen, essay about national honor society punctuation for quotes in an essay, concluding sentence for lord of the flies essay fear of death thesis. Do my popular descriptive essay on lincoln essay about college courses Essay on homelessness in the uk topic business essay. Stupid essays peter nguyen raymond carver what is it essay , fcat writing essay.
Term paper proofreading services uk best content proofreading services us: cheap school essay ghostwriters services uk professional critical essay proofreading service for mba, essay on land grabbing. Professional dissertation hypothesis writers websites for college office receptionist resume. Revised resume samples good resume for it project manager?
Agrifina Helga. Anonymous vFaknH. Iyaz Meindra. Skripsi Ptk. Irna Wahyuni. Nik Pisclovephy. David Arndt. More From Evan Husada Sidrap. Popular in Technology.
Science and Tech. Rajesh Yenugula. Hari Ram. Winnie Cai. Mehar Asif Ibrahim. Sumardi Fnu. Archit Lohokare. Rahul Sharma. Pugal Vendan. Saravanan Kannan.
0コメント