Monday, February 26, 2007

The Death of the American Dream

Just as a point of interest, this post started as a criticism of suburbs, then a rant against the priorities of those living in gated communities, and now it's a rant against the mistaken ideals of American-style (and thus Canadian) society.

The American dream is a powerful idea for a great many people, as it represents the ideal that merit alone will make you successful, and it can be summed up that in America, through hard work and intelligence you can become rich. While there are many cases in which someone has brought themselves from poverty to astounding wealth completely on their own, as a whole the American dream is dead. I'm not even sure it was alive.

Achieving wealth is no easy feat in the current social climate, reflected in figures showing the widening gap between the rich and the poor as well as descriptions of America being not so much a melting-pot as a centrifuge. If the American dream were true, then the deserving lower-class citizens would be achieving their goal of the ideal American life, and the middle-class would grow. Instead, the middle-class is fragmenting, with the upper-middle class having more wealth, and the lower-middle class having to take on more debt to live the life they feel they deserve.

The American dream promises equality of opportunity instead of equality of wealth. However, it is quickly clear the opportunities are not equal. The disparity starts when wealthy parents send their children to private schools while a poorer but more intelligent child is forced to struggle through public school. And given the huge financial cost of university, many intelligent and motivated but poorer students cannot attend a prestigious college while a richer student, especially if his parents have good connections, can. Finally, a university diploma no longer guarantees a range of good opportunities, but being rich and well-connected is. With money opening doors at every step of life, how can it be claimed that America is a land of equal opportunity?

One of the major causes of inequality of opportunity, and the resulting increasing disparity between the rich and the poor, is a misplaced set of priorities. As wealth becomes harder to obtain, people can either race for the glorious prestige of a huge house with a huge TV and a huge car in a walled, guarded community, or they can examine why this trend is occurring to begin with. The two are exclusive because by fighting your way to the top, the cost you unwittingly inflict on society ensures that inequality will increase. If everyone, everywhere examined the cost of their actions and weighed them against their personal benefit so as to minimize cost while maximizing benefit, then a great many social problems would become easier to address.

4 comments:

Rootless mind said...

Hey. Stop dissing people in the suburbs. I'm from a suburbish area right now. Does that mean I'm ignorant to the rest of the world? You are one strange young man although I kind of get what you mean. I don't like uptown hippy people because they are just as ignorant. You'll see what I'm talking about if you ever come to Tokyo! Anyway, I'd like to hear more of your claims.

Odm said...

Are you an SUV-driving yuppie? No? Obviously I'm directing this post at you, then :P.

Besides, I was making sweeping generalizations. Also, I'm going to edit it because I'm not happy with how it turned out. (I was tired while writing it.)

Rootless mind said...

Hello, hobo. You changed your post! And I quite like it. Yes, I do; not that I despised the other one. And you know what? You know what? YOU KNOW WHAT?????

I quite agree to your opinion!

Anonymous said...

"Land of equal opportunity" is a historical frame of looking at America that reflects how radical it was at its ideological inception. If you try and look at the terms absolutely and not historically, then you are adopting naive notions.

The rest of your arguments are just a rehash of a very dilute form of the social democrat philosophy. You do not even try to contest the neoliberal position here.

I suggest reading some critical theory, economics, and history. And try and stick to the original texts. The only utility of this blog seems to be broadcasting opinions you have built up through popular intellectualism. It's only by reading the original texts that you can realize the damage that pseudophilosophy does to the ideas by translating them into very one-dimensional, contemporary readings of arguments that the less-intellectual 95% of Americans can easily rationalize and refute based on blind faith, conditioning, and naive assumptions.