Nelson notes within the first few paragraphs into his composition: EVERYBODY SHOULD UNDERSTAND COMPUTERS. However, while he strives for a universal understanding of this “new” type of media, insisting on a textually informal relationship between the participant and the machine to attract all types of people, his modest proposal in education is very elitist.
To allow a student to steer away from the institutionalized curriculum by controlling one’s own education is simply looking at those who can actually manage to do so. The proposal ignores the larger picture of society—those who have not had specific educational backgrounds do not have the skills in order to perpetuate their education on their own. There are also those who have not been socialized into understanding that education for the sake of learning is important. There might not be factors that exist to help those who cannot learn in the “natural straight diagonal.” This proposal might widen the gap between the haves and the have-nots by relying too much upon personal will, something that can be influenced by social class. So the question I pose is…How legitimate do you think Nelson’s claim really is?
He also contradicts himself from the start by stating that in his book he attempts to steer away from "talking down." And just a few sentences later, he declares to the reader: "Computers are not everything, they are just an aspect of everything, and not to know this is computer illiteracy, a silly and dangerous ignorance."