Well, Sam Bowles and Herb Gintis seemed to think so when over thirty years ago, they wrote their classic study, "Schooling in Capitalist America: Educational Reform and the Contradictions of Economic Life" which explored the topic from a Marxist standpoint.
Jim Farmelant
---------- Original Message ---------- From: Doug Henwood <dhenwood at panix.com> To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] benn der, dun dat Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 07:28:22 -0400
On Oct 5, 2009, at 11:25 PM, shag carpet bomb wrote:
> ""The entire U.S. school system, from pre-K up, is structured from
> the very start to enable the rich to outcompete the poor," writes
> Michaels, "which is to say, the race is fixed. And the kinds of
> solutions that might actually make a difference -- financing every
> school district equally, abolishing private schools, making high
> quality child care available to every family -- are treated as if
> they were positively un-American."
>
> http://www.insidehighered.com/views/mclemee/mclemee170
>
> So, a guy who doesn't like neo-liberalism is an ardent defender
> of... Liberalism. Ain't he special. does he really think that high
> quality child care for everyone is going to fix the problem of
> inequality? That schools will level the playing field, thereby
> creating equal opportunity and that this is an advance over neo-
> liberalism?
Huh? Education is one of the mechanisms that reproduce class and structural inequality. How is it "liberal" to point this out? ___________________________________
____________________________________________________________ Lose up to 20 lbs in one month with a new diet. Click here. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/BLSrjpTFoYbcRUGdyDUdmeTUamiu547lrf29FMnH0pKwFVem9j9rDQxtyy0/