You’re adding a lot of layers and assumptions to this that aren’t there.

If someone isn’t literate, then they’re not qualified for higher education. You can focus on the actual problem, which is the education system failing to adequately support students in disenfranchised areas. Fixing that would help them qualify for higher education and get a leg up, so that they could enjoy some of that “privilege” of literacy that you accuse me of having.

But no, instead you want to say anyone who’s literate is an elitist, and we shouldn’t give a shit about the educational outcomes of marginalized areas because expecting those poor marginalized kids to learn how to read is just too much. Do you have any idea how patronizing that is?

I’m not the one denying that students in impoverished areas are capable of learning how to read and write. All I’m saying is that if they want to pursue higher education, they need to be able to read and write. It’s not that controversial. And their K-12 education should prepare them for that. If it doesn’t, that’s a problem.

You calling me “elitist” is a distraction from the problem, and that doesn’t serve students in marginalized areas who are being failed by the education system. If you want to just coddle them and say “It’s fine, you don’t need to be literate. Literacy is for the privileged elite,” then you are the one actively harming their future and obstructing them from gaining this “privilege” that you seem to despise so much.