Education and the 1%

            Providing education to the rich while denying it to the poor has traditionally been a favored tactic of those who seek to keep the poor in their place. Even in the modern day, we see history repeating itself as schools serving the lower classes consistently fail to properly educate their students and instead, prepares them for the life of the proletarians. The Chinese philosopher, Confucius, one said that “When the people are educated, the distinction of class disappears” (Confucius). By this he means that education, not money or lineage, is the sole root of class separation. When people are uneducated, the rich and powerful can delude and exploit them, but when the people see the world for how it is, they have the opportunity to choose their paths for themselves.

            Another issue with denying quality education to the working poor is that ignorance is the blue pill that prevents the people from seeing the world clearly. Without a proper education, many people don’t understand the greater picture of the world, and do not act to change their situation. As is in the case of many poor communities in America, the people do not believe that their situation can possibly get better, and resign themselves to the hand that fate dealt them. By doing this, the people accept the status quo, normalizing failure, and making change difficult in the long run.

            But perhaps one of the greatest motivations for stopping quality education to the working class is that it helps to raise a generation of low-skilled and cheap workers for big businesses. The greatest argument for a good education is that it allows a person the opportunity to choose a better life for themselves, and be eligible for skilled and higher paying jobs. Without such an education, the peoples’ lives are set as they are molded into whatever the corporations need. From the coalmines of Virginia to the workhouses in London, the practice of corporate stifling of education has kept workers in their place, and continues to do so in the ghettos of Chicago and East St. Louis. By allowing this act of class warfare to continue, we condemn our fellow Americans to the mercy of corporate interests.

After researching many of the Bay Area’s low-achieving schools, a strong pattern began to emerge. Within the Bay Area, the majority of failing schools are located in high population areas with low average incomes, and high crime rates such as Oakland, East Palo Alto, and Richmond. In addition, some cities with very affluent and very poor citizens such as San Francisco showed a high number of failing schools as well.  In contrast, the districts and counties with the least poorly performing schools were the more affluent and safe areas such as Marin County. This association between wealth and school performance strongly suggests that money and a safe environment are important factors in a school’s success.