My position is that it isn't the place of schools and educators to transmit culture. In a multi-cultural society, that is something to be done by family and one's ethnic community(ies). If that doesn't happen, I don't believe the schools have an obligation to teach one particular canon to make up for what children aren't getting at home and in their communities.

There is one exception to that, and that is when a school's mission is to pass on a particular culture's traditions and teach the curriculum in that culture's language. In the US, this is done either through private education or charter schools. But outside of that specific condition, I see no reason why we should continue to teach the Anglo American canon so exclusively. I have found it to be no more valuable and rich than other cultures canons, either as an educator, or as an individual, despite the protests of Anglocentric parents and professionals, like Harold Bloom and a number of people contributing here.

I absolutely abhor the suggestion that a person who isn't rooted in one specific cultural milieu, is somehow less well endowed a human being. To me, that suggests that people like CarolC and myself are less educated, less aware of the richness of literature, etc. I'm sure people here would not think that is the case, yet if one takes your arguments to their logical conclusion, that seems to be where you end up.

I don't believe for one second that people who have never been exposed to Blake or Shakespeare, who are resident in the US, must somehow be less aware of the dominant American culture's history. One need not be well versed in the winner's version of history, to know one's own.