In this article, LZ Granderson expresses his views of the new ideology of life in America as “what you do” instead of “who you are”. The economical state that the country is in and has grown to in the past decades has made it so our money defines us. Granderson exhibits of how society has lost the humanity in how we talk to each other in that we focus on what we do and how we come to pay for things instead of our names, and personal characteristics. He goes on to say, “This dichotomy has slowly disconnected the American dream from the idea of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness and attached it to one's ability to move up the ladder.”
In class we have talked a lot about the real opportunities the slaves have had as well as the poor to participate in the developing United States. Granderson describes this change as regarding to the past few decades, however I would like to pose the question, Is it really that new? The ability to vote in the early 1900’s was based on if you owned land. The quality of work and education was based on how much money you already possessed. The opportunities were not good, and I might suggest that they are still difficult to move up the ladder.
The suggestion of Granderson of the view of people as consumers and not as people has come and gone through different eras of time in this country. Now we see people for what they do and accomplish with discrimination of the jobs and those who fill the jobs. In the post civil war era, blacks were viewed and discriminated against just as today, though I feel it is not as racial as it used to be, rather by class. It was stated in class that politicians, those who dare get involved, try to focus on the current issue as a recent problem, however, to quote the common phrase, “history repeats itself,” this is a long standing issue and we would do well by recognizing the cycles and thought process throughout history. This will help society to maybe find the greater happiness in which the America Dream constitutes.
The problem with following the American Dream is that, like any facet of human life, a man’s dreams do not stand alone. They intersect with others and form a web of unlikely hopes that will be torn apart should any one dream become reality. Say you want to be the new president of some corporation. A lot of other people want that job and are just as entitled to the dream of getting it, to say nothing of the current president’s dream of living forever and never giving that job up. Maybe you want to bust a smuggling ring; too bad everyone in the ring entertains the wild, fantastic dream of not going to prison for the rest of their lives. Maybe you’d like to live in America but every night a redneck has terrifying, racist nightmares about a caricature of you stealing his job and repainting his flag to match the flag of your native land. Maybe you’d like to preserve the environment for future generations, but somewhere out there is a misanthrope who aspires to one day render the world incapable of supporting life because he was made fun of as a child. Maybe you’d just like to be happy, but that goes against the wishes of the woman who’s only goal in life is to ensure you die without experiencing more than six consecutive minutes of joy and who is secretly watching you read this as we speak (but she can’t see the screen so whatever you do don’t give away the fact that you know she’s there; just sit tight, look sad and await further instruction, we can beat her if we work together). The only time people’s dreams coincide is when something terrible happens and they want the person responsible to be punished. My point is, the Great American Dream is like anything Yoda says: it seems like a great idea until you follow it (for instance, do something without even trying some time; you’ll find that trying is a necessary ingredient to doing).
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed this article, as well as the accompanying post, and agree to a great extent that is not in reality a new phenomenon. One example I can think of from recent weeks that illustrates this is Herman Cain's reaction to the Occupy Wall Street protests. In response he said "Don't blame Wall Street, don't blame the big banks, if you don't have a job and you're not rich, blame yourself...it is a person's fault if they failed." Now regardless of personal political views, there is a clearly defined link between personal worth and financial worth. If you are not rich, you become a failure in this view.
ReplyDeleteTo use a more personal example as a history major I have been asked numerous times why I chose a "soft" major, or why I didn't pick something with a more direct path to jobs. It is rare to be asked why I chose to study history, or what I feel that I can contribute with a history degree, or why I love to study history. Rather, the focus is on how I am going to make money with it. I understand that gainful employment is important, but this again demonstrates the idea that our economic opportunity has become the most important criterion by which we view individuals.
In my own opinion this is truly unfortunate, and I mirror the thoughts of Granderson in feeling that this type of job oriented judgment is profoundly limiting to our ability to relate to each other on a human level.