Fascinating that a natural conclusion of Young's powerful knowledge for all philosophy is the abolition of public and probably grammar schools. I wonder how many of his adherents are aware of and support this idea.

As an English teacher of colour, I really fear the idea of a national boundary around subjects like English and history. While literature in an English-speaking world is going to be different from that of a French-speaking or Russian-speaking world (etc), the literary canon and the subjects we teach about history have largely been very eurocentric. This isn't useful or helpful because it ignores the fact that the world is cohesive and integrated - it has been throughout history. The contributions of other countries and cultures to British and English-speaking literature and history are often ignored or downplayed. Everyone has a right to know how the contributions of non-European countries have been significant. It's important for so many reasons. For one, it actually helps to curb the spread of white supremacy. It's much easier to be convinced that Europe is the "best" continent when you have no knowledge of the literary, artistic and historical contributions of non-European people, for one. Then there's the fact that we live in an increasingly globalised world where these subjects help us to build understanding and empathy towards one another. I am in no way saying that either Prof. Young or Mr Robinson are implying we shouldn't do this. I'm also not trying to make a "slippery slope" argument. I just want to point out that knowledge of the history, art, literature, music, etc of other cultures can be a profoundly powerful way to add value to our students' lives and education.