Elite's repression of the rest of us!

Synthesis Paper: Repression of the Lower Class
Throughout my life one thing I have always noticed is how the elite manage to repress those that are in classes below them. This is no different in the realm of education or literacy. The way the government distributes funds for resources and types of resources illustrates this elitist view that exists within our educational community. For instance, teaching with technology is a board initiative; but not all school have access to the technology which is necessary for such a program to run; whereas some schools mostly in affluent neighborhoods have access and technology coaches that come to their schools and help with programing and IT help. I'm sure if we were to ask around our class what technology is made available to each teacher and their students we would have varying results based on the financial access of the area we all teach in.
Therefore the theme I have been noticing throughout the readings in both Finn's novel and previous readings for this class is the theme of the elite repressing the lower class. Since our first class' reading we have looked at the “underclass” and tried to examine why they just can't move up. We have read in many chapters about the different types of literacy, and the history of the “Corresponding Societies” becoming outlawed because; surprise surprise, the elite did not like the fact that the underclass were thinking and talking, and my goodness they even had ideas! The elite's view of how they teach literacy using it “to understand and control.” (Finn 125). Should we not worry about that definition, the word “control”? We have also discussed the difference of those that live in “Mainville” and the domesticated literacy that has kept the people of “Roadville” repressed.
We all come from a position in life, and maybe not just one, we have a cultural position, a literacy position and our power position in society. The most powerful are the elite, or rather they would have us all think they are powerful. I mean even their level of literacy is called “powerful” literacy, whereas middle-class literacy has been deemed as domesticated or functional at best. At best it seems as though the working-class are working toward the third stage of literacy which is the informational literacy but no where did it make reference that they had reached this level of literacy. Once again keeping the middle-class two lengths away from the elite. And who coined these terms? Someone that came from an elite language background no doubt. Even the words used to describe at what level they read at has very negative undertones. I know we should all aspire to reach beyond what we have now, does that mean if all we have now is a functional level of literacy to complete our daily jobs and routines that we are less in society? Once again someone has given the power to in their language and literature repress others.
When looking at those people in “Roadville” the author has what seems to be a negative approach to their level of literacy. And at first I seemed to be placing the same negativity towards their way of life. But we need to think we all can't be the prime minister, so why don't we look at why it is necessary for everyone to achieve the same literacy level? Who are we to look down on their society which functions and people are able to live and contribute to their society. I think it is a matter of what people want and need.
Language and literacy can be seen as a commodity, some people are willing to want it and pay for it, while others just don't see the value. It is unfortunate that so many people who wish to attain higher levels of literacy can not attain their goal, something that is quite reminiscent of our past. “Corresponding Societies” wished to discuss literature critically, and even though many recognized literacy's ability to be potentially powerful, the elite took this power away from them by stating that those that participated in these groups would be charged with treason. Or of those that lived in Milwaukee and couldn't afford to attend school to provide themselves with chances to better themselves for better jobs.
There is always the question what can we do to change this ability for the elite to repress the under and middle-classes and their rights to an education which is as rich in critical thought as those and their elite counter-parts? Business Week briefly attempts to answer the question of how the upper and elite classes can help but then merely places the blame on the poor people themselves for not doing better. I as well do not have the answer to that question! If I did I'm sure someone a part of the educational elite realm would find a way to keep me quiet! I think that recognizing the problems and discussing them and moving forward in our teaching of critical literacy skills is one way to start the change, and I think we have come a long way from our histories of literacy in many ways. But I think it is also important to recognize that not all people strive to reach the same level of literacy and using terminology that puts down particular levels of literacy may make certain societies look down upon themselves and perpetuate the idea that the elite is better. But we all can't be elite!