Personal Success May Discover the Best Presidential Candidate - Article Example

? LaBier, D. September). The presidential campaign reveals two contrasting views of personal success. Psychology Today. Retrieved from http www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-new-resilience/201209/the-presidential-campaign-reveals-two-contrasting-views-personal-succ Wellcome Trust (2012, August 23). Study reveals human drive for fair play. ScienceDaily. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedaily.com­ /releases/2012/08/120823112934.htm Personal Success May Discover the Best Presidential Candidate With only a few months away, the presidential election is on most American’s minds. Most people have heard countless paid advertising of what feels like yellow journalism, and Americans have been inundated with the media. When looking for an article for this essay, I found it surprising that Psychology Today would have an article on this topic. LaBier (2012) has as his premise, that there are two different views of success that are being suggested by each candidate. LaBier (2012) suggests that President Obama’s view of success is a more progressive view than Romney’s. President Obama has the view of “whole life success” (LaBier, 2012, 0. 1). President Obama sees success as something that is ongoing, to include an aspect of personal achievement, and it includes helping other improve their lives. In contrast, Romney supports an older, more conservative and narrowly focused idea of success. Romney sees success as having money, achieving power and prestige, and achieving this for an individual purpose (LaBier, 2012). LaBier (2012) makes an intersitng point and one that I think is a part of a central debate. Do Americans want a president who wants to help everyone, or do they want someone who only wants the wealthy to succeed? This seems like one question that Americans are being asked to answer. LaBier’ article also makes the reader think. He has created a strong way to compare and contrast the two candidates based not so much on their experience, so much as on their idea of success. Romney suggests that if people do not have the money to go to college, they should start a business (LaBier, 2012). LaBier shows the fallacy in this reasoning. The biggest flaw that I see is that if the average person has no money to go to college, they usually do not have the capital to start a business. Romney suggests a very idealistic way of looking at the world and seems to speak from his perspective of an American, who has always had money. Romney also suggests that if people do not have the money for a business, they should borrow from their parents ( LaBier, 2012). Many people who are poor or middle class, do not have parents who have money to lend or give to them, in order to start a business. In this article, LaBier (2012) points out that Romney speaks from a position of wealth and has no understanding of others who are not wealthy. Another interesting point that LaBier (2012) makes is that Romney may be seeking the Presidency as the pinnacle of his career: “He [Romney] appears to view it [The Presidency] as the capstone of his career, the final step: (LaBier, 2012, p. 1). To me, this is the height of arrogance. This reminded me of some of the media coverage that says that Republicans are upset with Romney for many reasons, but one reason is because he is not saying what he will do if elected President. Perhaps he feels he does not have to explain what he will do, because he is who he is, and all people need to know is that he will make changes. In contrast, LaBier (2012) quoted Michell Obama’s speech to the Democratic convention: “Success isn’t about how much money you make, it’s about the difference you make in people’s lives” (LaBier, 2012, p. 2). I agree. I think that today, success is about helping others achieve success, more than it is about singularly making your own success. In looking at these two philosophies, I am struck by how differently the two candidates see the world. Romney states many times htat he wants changes to be made, and he only seems to believe that wealthy people should benefit. This was more evident recently because of the videotape that has created such controversy. He sees the wealthy as the hard workers who have made their money, and are entitled to keep it at the expense of the non-wealthy. This attitude is very scary because most Americans will be negatively affected by this attitude should Romney become President. LaBier (2012) explains that the whole life view of success is a more progressive way of thinking and has the best interest of everyone in mind. He says this means contributing to the value of other people’s lives. Some of the benefits include, “sharing and preserving resources for the public good” (LaBier, 2012, p. 2). LaBier also states that openness to all people, supporting the well-being and growth of all communities and rejecting doing work only for the gain of one individual (LaBier, 2012). I like the newer idea of success. It feels more welcoming than the old paradigm and more realistic for the common man and woman. LaBier (2012) suggests that this new type of success is why celebrities have pet projects that help other people. According to LaBier (2012) there are many studies that indicate that people have an innate drive for fair play. He links to a Science Daily article that also state that people must have a balance between what they think is fair, and their own self-interest (WelcomeTrust, 2012). LaBier suggests that people will reach out to others when they are focused on giving and helping. I would think that the average American wants to feel that they are able to help others and they would want a President who would help all people; unfortunately there are people who do not want everyone to be helped because they feel helping everyone will take away from their own gains. LaBier (2012) also provides a historical look at the concept of success and how it has changed since the Great Depression. The attitude after the Great Depression was much like Romney’s view, in that people saw self-interest and money as more important than anything else. When the 60’s came along, people began to struggle with the old idea in favor of this newer idea of success and people began to reach out to others (LaBier, 2012). As I thought back on this history, I also see that there have been many changes and redefinitions of success throughout my lifetime. One issue that came up for me as I was reading this article, was whether these two different ideas of success were cultural. President Obama is multi-racial and was brought up as a multi-racial child by a white grandmother. She instilled certain values in him, no doubt about helping others, and he knows what it is like to be middle class and move to upper class. He does not seem to ignore his roots, which may be why he goes to little towns and talks to the middle class people. Romney grew up in a white, privileged home and seems to have been taught different values. He understands the privilege class and perhaps this is why he has a more self-interest way of thinking. In my opinion, this has nothing to do with a political party and more to do with the men and their strengths as leaders. They have a choice between working for all people or working for a chosen few. Although LaBier (2012) provides only one side of this idea, he makes many valid points. He does not promote one person over another, but he provides a well throughout article that provides a way to look at this topic differently. Read More