convoluted question

Here goes nothing:

The Gee and Royster articles both make clear that literacy (as well as policies and perceptions related to literacy) is a social justice issue. Gee mentions that school systems tend to reinforce the established class system; would the simplification of common-place literacy practices (such as re-writing aspirin bottle warnings to be more easily scrutable) also help entrench social inequities? Less specifically, how does a society reconcile the need for more honest and authentic forms of literacy (a social justice issue), with the presumed goal of increasing the conventional literacy standard, to the point where more people can understand a text like, say, Ulysses (also mentioned by Gee)? How can pragmatic goals be reconciled with less-pressing aesthetic or intellectual ones?