I guess most of us know what the American dream is. Certainly all Americans do, and I suspect that almost everyone outside the U.S. does too.

For the purposes of this post, use the following definition.
American Dream: The idea that anyone, regardless of social or economic standing, has the ability to become whatever they want---be that rich, famous, powerful, or <insert your favorite thing here>.

Most Americans view this notion as the best thing that America has going for it. As far as this removes discrimination I'm in favor of it. But it also produces a toxic mindset, IMO.

Suppose there are 30 children in a group. In this country, we tell them that anyone of them can be the best. Well, that's true. It could be any of them, and we can't necessarily tell which it might be. But it can't be all of them. If these children fight against each other in an effort to be the best, then a few will rise to the top to the detriment of the rest. OTOH, if they work toward cooperation, then the entire group will be better, and there won't be near as much distinction between the "best" and "worst", but rather those with certain strengths will help those will weaknesses in that area. Further, trying to be the best that you can be is all well and good; but over-reaching yourself typically leads to disaster. So those children whose ability would suggest they be rather average, either get discouraged and do terrible or they try to reach the top, fail, and end up falling flat on their face.

This "you can be the best" crap is at the very heart of "Americanism." And I think it sucks. I think it's a (the?) major reason that our children seem to be so lost (think school shootings, teen drug abuse, STDs, etc.) We are telling them that if they're just normal people then they aren't good enough. But almost all of them WILL be normal people. As a parent, I understand that we all want our children to be special. But I would rather have my children be happy average humans than to have them chase some mythical prize that they probably can't get and would find hollow if they did.


Thoughts?

More importantly, I see the enshrining of mediocrity as a large large part of the root cause of our problems. Your parents may think you're the most precious person to ever be born on this planet, but the rest of us think you're an insufferable asshole (not you specifically, BNS).

But yes, this pressure to "be the best" is a big problem. Look at the incidences of cheating, and how it's now accepted to be the norm. If you aren't holding at least a 3.5 GPA, you can forget getting into a good school. Kids aren't allowed to be kids any more. Hell, one district just started requiring *9th* graders to pick a major. When I was 13, I didn't know what I wanted to do that weekend, let alone for the rest of my life.

But I see the rest of the problem as being overly-permissive parents, and an overly permissive society, in general. While I'm a social liberal in many respects, even I can tell that there's far too much tolerance of what should be considered intolerable behavior, and even less action against it.

First off, I don't consider that mediocrity; I consider it piss-poor. I am not encouraging people to sit around on their asses and not try anything; I'm saying shift focus to being happy, getting along with others, and contributing to society rather than trying to "make it big."
Well, I don't think a majority of the population should be in higher education anyway. Today, you can't get a decent job without a college degree, but it shouldn't be that way. That's really a different topic though, I guess.
Well, yeah. That's a problem too.

I remember reading that the upward mobility in America was actually pretty low, compared to a lot of other countries. Generally, people stay around the same bracket as their parents. So, in a large part it's really just a dream.

I think the biggest obstacle to class mobility is inheritance. IMO people should make their own money. Either inheritance should be taxed near 100%, of money should expire in value. Then the game would actually be a little more fair for each new generation.

Of course! Obesity, boredom and getting shot, the American dream.

I think there's a misunderstanding here. What I'm talking about is the unreasonable praise heaped on children for just doing what they were supposed to. I'm all for positive reinforcement, but don't go overboard. I'm talking more about things like graduation ceremonies for 1st grade graduations, and the other ways we've found to make kids feel "special" for having done nothing special.

Ah, I see what you mean. Yeah, that's stupid.

I completely agree, in the sense that I think children should have a more realistic notion of their self-importance, or lack there-of. You have to make yourself great. You don't just wait to get discovered .

It does relate well to the point about upward mobility, in that I think we have a winner take all society. This is unfortunate, but persists because everybody believes they'll be the ONE that wins the lottery or the ONE that becomes president or the ONE that wins American Idol. If people were more realistic about their chances they wouldn't be so happy about that $8 an hour job. They tolerate it (way too much), often because they see it as a mere stepping stone to inevitable greatness.

Hey, if little Georgie B. can do it, why can't I? If the children's parents aren't Georgie B. Sr. or Barbie B. then maybe they should understand how unlikely they are to be an uber-winner.

Seems to me that, from what you're saying, the American Dream doesn't necessarily produce a toxic mindset, but people confuse "being what you want to be" with being "the best" somehow and then kind of go crazy with that.

Personally, I've never seen that, though. When I was in public school, there was no mention of being the best at all. It was always "just wallow in your own mediocrity, it's okay. There's no difference between being totally average and expressing your individuality."

Precisely. There was an interesting study done a few years ago, where they surveyed people on what they thought their intelligence was relative to others. What they found was that the smarter a person was, the more likely they were to believe that everyone else was just as smart. Conversely, and most interestingly to me, was that the less intelligent a person was, the more likely they were to believe that they were smarter than everyone else.

What this leads me to think is that there's only two possible outcomes from this situation for people of average and below intelligence.

1) They eventually figure out that they aren't as smart as they were led to believe, resulting in a crushed, or at least bruised, ego.

2) They never figure it out, and go through life frustrated because their "brilliant" plans never quite seem to work.

If, instead, these people had had it made clear to them that while everyone is a unique little snowflake, simply being yet another snowflake doesn't actually make you special, they might be both happier with their own life and fuck up the lives of fewer people around them with their hair-brained schemes.

deleted

I dont think it is the inheritence of other that makes the difference. The real inherentence that helps is the education and social network that is much easier to create when one is born into a wealthier family. And the real way to inprove vertical mobility is to help people at least with the education(and having a living when you do it.) bit. Perhaps people in America focus too much that it is possible in principle to get education via scholarships, but forget that, although it helps a few, this is a drop on a hot plate. People need to be able to do it while still having other problems in their lives too, as is the practical reality.
Giving people a practical chance like this, in the long term, will also decrease crime and such.
(Of course this will cost money, taxes, and much of it from the rich, so maybe this is redundant.)

That's a good idea ... I like the idea of "free" education myself ... and giving everyone an equal chance to succeed.

My idealized version of government would be a mixture of socialism and a meritocracy.

IMO, some basic level of education should be provided (if the person desires) for free. Beyond that, the better a person does, the cheaper the education should be. If someone's getting straight A's through med school (for example), it should be completely paid for by taxes. I don't see it as spending as much as investing money in people ... the best resource a country has.

My worry with inheritance, is that it's a large scale transfer of un-earned wealth. Often I think it's seen as innocuous or even good, but it's just pure nepotism, and a good ol' boy system that's not based in any kind of merit. Not that any one particular inheritance is harmful (since likely it's seems like a sweet deal for the person getting it) but on whole or large scale I think it actually harms most people overall.

Agree.
How would you feel about leaving inheritance untaxed up to some fixed amount, and taxing the hell out of it over that amount?

I think the mentality you describe certainly exists. Perhaps they exist in different ways and yet simultaneously. I would say it this way: You can be the best, but if you aren't the best then you might as well be a bum, because only first place counts.

That sounds fair to me ...

Are American Dreams any different to UK Dreams? Is there a language difference as in American English? I always thought that the American Dream is the British Dream with Knobs on - there again I could be wrong. I've been known to be wrong before...

In subjudice 379, para 1024, of a document I have since lost (presumably I've burnt it for safety reasons) I made a statement that I now seem to have forgotten, but I'm sure I was wrong making that statement. By the time everyone got to the offending paragraph, just about everyone was bored to tears and promptly fell asleep. It was a boring paper anyway! That's my life in a nutshell. Bordom - that is, until I discovered Ubuntu! Certainly made waves in my mind, and was a whole lot better than Microcrap!

BNS, if I may, I think you've compltely misunderstood or misinterpreted the concept of the "American dream." You seem to see it as some sort of guarantee or promise about outcome rather than opportunity.

The criterea to judge the American dream is not by looking at how happy or successful everyone is, you have to look at whether anyone was prevented from pursuing success and happiness.

There are refugees who came here in the 1970's not knowing a word of English, no money to their name, and now they own businesses and their kids are going to the best colleges.

The term "American dream" can be used in a few different ways. I am all for the right of the common people to rise as far as their ability will take them. That's a legal right and I wouldn't dare change it.

On the other hand, I'm afraid that it's too often used in ways that are not helpful. It isn't my interpretation so much as it is what I see. I'm OK with encouragement drenched in reality. But I think that too many people have caught onto the idea of the little guy making it big without realizing the difficulty it involves and the fact that most people cannot do it no matter how hard they try. Do you believe you could be as good a golfer as Tiger Woods if you only worked hard enough? I don't. I just plain don't have the natural affinity for it. I think too many people forget that "hard work" just isn't enough to be "great" though it's more than enough to live an adequate, comfortable life---if the hard work isn't wasted on stupid things.

I guess I'm still not sure where you're coming from. No, I probably couldn't be as good at golf as Tiger Woods, but there's no expectation that I should be either. The thing is, nothing is stopping me from trying to be better at golf than him. That's the America dream.