I Search for the American Dream - Speech or Presentation Example

It is a popular belief that the American Dream is a myth. I pose the question is it or isn’t it? The dream that one can become something from nothing is the main reason why America is the fastest growing country. It is often seen as a melting pot encompassing many different religions and nationalities. People move to America with dreams of becoming wealthy, but many of the ideologies that have existed within the country for years inhibit these dreams from coming true. There are many theories and statistics connected to this topic, some I am familiar with and most I am not. What I do know is that in the course of my life I do want to attain a reasonable amount of success. My main interest for my life is Interior Design, but no business can succeed without the correct mindset. Ethics like hard work, discipline and the belief that race and religion aren’t a factor in all that is necessary to become successful in what is considered to be one of the most prosperous countries in the world, this is the American Dream. It is a dream that requires blind faith in the American government, a trust in the virtues of others, and faith in one’s self. It is also a dream that whether one wants to believe it or not, most people adopt. I already feel that the ideals this dream expects people to adhere to are based on a mythological America. The question I pose in this research paper is whether or not actual success, in America, is based mostly on a blind and devout belief in the ideals of the American Dream, or if this dream is just another tools used by those in power to impede the success of other’s and maintain their own personal wealth? What I want to know How successful are most of those who promote the ideals embodied by the American Dream? Are minorities like Oprah Winfrey, Arnold Schwarzenegar and Collin Powel proof that there is no longer a race problem in this country and proof that the American Dream is a reality? What are some of the arguments that oppose and favor a belief in this constitution? What are the facts? The Search While doing my research, I found very close connections between a few of the articles. In some cases I made my own connections, but I feel the entire body of this section keeps my task of uncovering the myth of the American Dream in mind. Article 1 It is Harlon L. Dalton’s belief that Horatio Alger’s writings, during the mid to late 1800’s, promoted a destructive myth that overlooked the realities of society. Dalton specifically targets Alger’s story Ragged Dick, about a young man who devoutly works his way up the American corporate ladder slowly succeeding based on his merit. Dalton feels the myth implied by this is that the American dream is accessible to all those who are willing to work for it. Alger has been a highly acclaimed writer in American culture, and the popularity of his work partly suggests that most Americans have an inherent belief in this myth. If this mindset is a part of the mental tapestry of America, and it is as destructive as Dalton claims it to be, it would mean that American’s are inherently delusional. One might argue that this is only the problem of the minorities in this country, but Dalton protests that part of the want for most Americans to believe in this myth is fueled by a white discomfort with addressing the reality of a racial problem in America. He identifies this when he says, By interring the myth of Horatio Alger, or at least forcing it to coexist with social reality, we can accomplish two important goals. First, we can give the lie to the idea that Black people can simply lift themselves up by their own bootstraps. With that pesky idea out of the way it is easier to see why White folk need to take joint ownership of the nation’s race problem… (Dalton) This idea of dual ownership for racial injustice is a concept Dalton feels most whites avoid and is a concept we see on many occasions being played out by the media in daily society. There are many real life examples of the destructive nature of American prejudice, on the black pursuit for success. In many cases we see examples of blacks who appear to be on top of the world. Dalton points out that Alger is often brought up during conversations about people like Colin Powel; this is also true of Oprah Winfrey. Both figures rose from impoverished situations to become incredibly rich and powerful; both are black, and could be used to protest that there is no racial problem in the United States, and that Alger’s ideals are in fact not myth. The truth is the racial problem still exists in America, only it is more subtle than it was when Alger disregarded it. This great amount of prejudice can be seen in O.J. Simpson’s life, and his rise to, and fall from success. The O.J. Simpson trial has become one of the key events of American history. It embodies all of the socioeconomic and legal politics of our country’s structure. A modern day tragedy, Simpson’s rise and fall, in America, struggles to escape an immediate comparison to the plot of Shakespeare’s Othello. It is a true life classic tale encompassing themes like: the black man’s burden, immoral aristocracy, and the contradictions between social justice/injustice. On top of that, his life story has become a pop-culture phenomenon, due to its themes of love, sex, betrayal and murder. His story also sheds light on the fact that the racial ideology of our past has a heavy lingering influence on the way our society still functions. William Shakespeare’s Othello is one of his most controversial tragedies. In part because, it is a love story about deception and betrayal, but mostly because it involves a love affair between an interracial couple. Considering the era in which the play was written, it’s no surprise why Shakespeare is held in such high regard for being ahead of his time. Horatio Alger disregards the same concepts of race and ideology that Shakespeare is wise enough to confront in Othello. Dalton points out this incompetence on Alger’s part when he mentions how Alger wrote more for popularity and his own success than for deep meaning. The story starts out with Othello attaining great glory and acclaim from the people of Venice. An African (Moore), he earns the love and admiration of the beautiful Venetian Desdemona, which warrants him access into a predominantly white Italian aristocracy. Ragged Dick and Othello are exact opposites, because Shakespeare is actually socially conscious. The story of Othello takes place during a time period in Europe when cross cultural relations weren’t even considered, let alone frowned upon. Othello is considered to be a Muslim by the Christian Venetians. Yet, he is called upon by the duke of Venice to defend them from the Turks, who are also Muslim. After victory is inadvertently achieved, Othello is a hero, but he is still considered a black Muslim, in a white Christian society. A major theme that can’t be avoided in the play is that of racial separatism. Despite all of Othello’s accomplishments, he is still vilified for being black by the culture he has assimilated into, once it is discovered he murdered his wife. The message expressed in a story about a black man who is celebrated as a hero, changes his religion and even marries into the society, but still can’t achieve full acceptance is a very timeless and socially conscious message. When you take an in depth look at the attitude that is truly necessary for one to make a lone effort towards furthering the genuine full racial integration of America, it puts characters like O.J. Simpon (murder aside) and Othello in a positive light for their rebellious loner-like natures, and their fearless inclination towards cross cultural confrontations. It also condemns all those who settle into social tribes of convenient sameness. Both Othello and Simpson are absolute anti-heroes compared to Alger’s Ragged Dick, whose ethnicity isn’t even considered. In a world defined by white and black, sociologically, Othello and O.J. tread a shade of grey. Their circumstances embody the characteristics of the American Dream as it applies to black America. By being fearless toward cross cultural interaction, they create an identity separate from a solely ethnicity defined existence. This is what they all have in common, and on this they can build a relationship. Those who isolate themselves from anyone different and congregate in their same race unions conform along with a growing distance from cross cultural understanding. Eventually the only trait they hold in common with those of different races is a distrust and sense of threat. It’s ironic that Dalton cites the fear of threat as one of the key ingredients to hate and violence; because as we see here, segregate views are the core cause of this type of fear. Social injustice warrants the in depth analyses of some of the key correlating conflicts within the Black Man’s burden. The type of social exclusion both Othello and Simpson experience to certain individual class and race stances on morality. I think morals legalize our sense of justice by identifying what we owe to whom, and whose needs, views, and well-being count, and whose do not. We use this sense of morals to decide who we accept into our social circles. Those who do not fall into the specific criteria, be it a certain race, class religion etc.., they are subject to exclusion. Before Simpson’s trial, he was welcome and accepted in all of the most elite of social circles. When O.J. was in the lime light of the public eye, he was considered an all American hero. He was doing Hertz commercials, and staring in films, like Naked Gun; he was America’s poster boy of racial equilibrium. Publicized as the social opposite to Jim Brown, who was just as prominent of a running-back, but still held underlying label of too black to market, O.J. had gained full acceptance in white America. He had money, fan admiration, and a beautiful white wife. The same moral community which accepted him would be the group of people to destroy him. This is the limit to success Dalton feels is placed on blacks. It’s very similar to a statement Chris Rock once said in his stand up; he says, when you’re white the sky is the limit, but when you’re black the limit’s the sky. Article 2 Rose Blue and Corinne J. Naden would most likely disagree with this statement. In their essay From Colin Powell: Straight to the Top, they praise the man for his accomplishments and present him as the embodiment of the American Dream. The essay serves as more of an advertisement for the United States’ armed forces program than anything else. It is also a modern day example of the same type of propaganda Alger uses to promote his myth. Only this is a myth directly saying the American Dream is a black dream as well. This is actually a hot topic because it points out a gradual change in ideals as well as a tendency of Americans to maintain the status quo. Dick is a very bland and two dimensional character in the story. On top of this, he never actually shows hard work or discipline. The sole reason for his advancement is the fact that he saves a rich man’s son, which argues that success is not based on merit, but who one happens to know. As I have already shown, there are many complex divides between black s an whites preventing black from the necessary social interactions for success. Dalton would most likely question the real life version of Alger’s story if Dick were a young black male. Alger’s rags to riches genre is constantly brought up in discussions on people like Arnold Schwarzenegger, and Colin Powel. In fact, it’s often the media’s use of icons like these men that help perpetuate an unjust playing field in American society. If Colin Powel were to cross the same line as O.J., all of his past successes would no longer matter. The same as Simpson’s victories were taken away from him. There are still many who argue that O.J. Those in favor of the status quo of American society might argue that there is no factual information to prove that Colin Powel would be disregarded by white America, if he were to make a mistake, because it hasn’t happened yet. They would most likely consider this view to be predictive speculation. Those who might argue in Alger’s defense point out that slavery still existed during Alger’s lifetime and that he lived in a different era. These same people don’t tend to think that there is a racial problem in the United States; and like Dalton points out, they would rather not address it than to be confronted with a discomforting reality (Dalton). If this is the level of injustice in the economic structure today, I can only imagine the stat it was in during the late 1800’s when Alger popularized his books. Dalton points out in his essay that many Alger supporters feel that the myth is necessary for one’s psychological survival. He does this by quoting Shelley Taylor’s view about the human mind that, [T]he Human mind is oriented toward mental health and…at every turn it construes events in a manner that promotes benign fictions about the self, the world, and the future. The mind is…oriented towards overcoming…(Taylor). The key idea Dalton attempts to point out is that for some blacks the reality of their plight might be so unbearable, they would rather be delusional to feel they have a reason to try. This makes the American Dream a positive myth to be upheld, and not something to be seen as destructive. It also enforces a belief in the structure of the American government. Article 3 Until the twentieth century both scholars and the public revered the Framers as demigods and canonized the Constitution as the crowning symbol of a democratic revolution against tyranny. However, the many publicized political and corporate scandals of the Progressive Era in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries influenced historians to begin viewing the Constitutional Convention with a more jaundiced eye. (Krawczynksi, 2003) In his essay, The U.S. Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, Keith Krawczynksi, convinced that men were motivated primarily by economic self-interest and that class conflict pervaded human events, argues that the Founding Fathers carried out a counterrevolution by creating a reactionary document to protect their interests against popularly controlled state governments that passed cheap paper money legislation, debtor laws, and other measures that favored small farmers and artisans at the expense of wealthy creditors (2003). To prove their case they pointed to the many provisions in the Constitution that checked popular sovereignty: the difficult procedure for adopting amendments, the judicial veto, the election of senators by state legislators, the election of the president by an electoral college, the appointment of Supreme Court justices by the president, and the awesome power conferred to the central government to suppress popular dissent. Thus, the Constitution was equipped with a system of minority checks and vetoes designed to prevent majority rule (Krawczynksi, 2003). There are many myths applied to American history. One of these myths in particular is that the founding fathers were all selfless and priceless politicians who were able to rise above the tyranny of their day to advance the workings of Democratic government. American reverence for the framers and the undisputed worship of the constitution are virtues instilled in all citizens born within this society. The majority of the Founding Fathers were wealthy conservatives who were actually opposed to democracy. Krawczynksi notes that they often referred to it as a mobocracy. This perception resulted in this elitist class constructing laws that would better maintain the control of government in the hands of the wealthy, and prevent the majority from realizing their strength. Krawczynksi further points this out in his essay when he says, the Founding Fathers deliberately designed the new American government to make it difficult for any mass political movement to challenge the political dominance by the traditional ruling elite (2003). He points out that their behavior is justifiable by the fact that these framers were also the main men who risked hide and limb to protect their political standings from the British, and they weren’t about to just turn around and hand it over to the public after winning the war. It is Krawczynksi’s view that these patriots did not intend to revolutionize democracy and turn an elitist system, based on upper-class leadership, on its heals; their sole intention was to gain independence from Britain in order to get the country out of their pocket. The Patriot elite did not for-see the way the American commoners would view independence from Britain as the time to adopt egalitarianism. Aware that this Constitution would be aggressively opposed by the majority working class, the signing and construction of the deceleration was held in private. The media was used conceal the constitutions true purpose as well as to sway people in its favor. We see this control of the media used daily in news papers, on television and the web, an example of this is the Republican Party’s financial hold over Fox News. Book 1 The following is the result of information I found in a book on sociology by acclaimed French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu. He just recently died in 2002. This is my testament to the man, and my take on his most popular publication. The constitution adheres to freedom of the press, but the press doesn’t represent the freedom of the people. In his book, his most popular work is Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgment of Taste, sociological genius Pierre Bourdieu asserts that public opinion does not truly exist. This poses the question, how should we conceive public opinion? If it is true that the public does not exist, than the real question is, whose opinion is public opinion? Rational Choice Theory poses the idea that human beings form their opinions and decisions based on collective observations and calculations. It also assumes all individuals are well informed of all of their options and that it is an inherent human tendency to think everyone makes decisions this way. If this is true, it would explain the blind faith people have in public opinion. It is a faith so devout; it often sways and molds popular culture ideals. Pierre Bourdieu strongly negates this view. In all of Bourdieu’s beliefs, his most popular is his assertion that the public does not exist (1984). This concept is addressed in his book, Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgment of Taste, in that he feels there is a different of class taste between the ruling class and popular culture. But, within this conflict, there is no public, only a media mediating between the two and a culture to which they often cater to do so. Article 4 Jon Simons addresses this concept in his essay, Governing the Public: Technologies of Mediation and Popular Culture, when he says, …technologies constitute the people as a mediated public. The public is only amenable to representation in the form of an electorate which is an effect of technical organization that can mediate between people at a distance from each other. The key point of this analysis is that the public does not exist prior to or outside of its constitution. (Simons, 2002) His essay evaluates the importance of media technologies within a democracy. Bourdieu feels that in this field of power struggle, the ruling class uses their cultural capital to assert their distinction (1984). This is seen in the way politicians might only use terms or syntax understandable to the elite of society. This separation between popular culture and the elite culture of a society makes it virtually impossible for government officials to ever get the unanimous appeal for which they often aspire. Most political elites view popular cultures’ apathy towards politics with great disdain. Even still, they relentlessly attempt to relate to popular culture voters, whom they know will support them. In John Fiske’s critique on television, Television Culture he analyzes the nature of what makes popular television. He concludes that the shows that succeed in gaining popularity tend to have many symbols and plot lines containing multiple meanings. He also states that remain within a duality of containment and resistance (1987). This idea basically revolves around the fact that television producers, who are viewed as the upper class and political elite, are expected to produce material that correspond with popular culture. This material that the elite minority culture produces for the popular culture contradicts elitist ideals but allows the status quo to remain intact. This means the political elite can only remain the elite so long as they humor the beliefs and ideals of their less powerful but more dominant counterparts. The rules Fiske establishes for television shows can very easily be applied to the media. They present the media as a tool being used to prey on the wants and needs of different cultures. The idea that there is no such thing as public perception in America, and that what we deem to be public perception is just a popular culture molded and created by the media to entertain the American majority, while still maintaining the ideals and power of their elite class financiers, is a common conspiracy theory. It is also true. The Federal government appears to have their hands in everything because they do. This is the result of technological advancement enforcing a constitution designed for a central government to grow in power over time. The biggest myth held about the Federalists is that they were opposed to giving the Federal government too much power. This myth is negated by the actions of the Framers who attained office, as well as the presidents who came behind them. It must never be forgot, that all of these men were of the Financial elite of America. So, those Federalists who claimed to be liberalists in favor of Democracy, were only so in favor as would maintain their wealth. The appearance of caring for the will of the people, to maintain ones own wealth, as demonstrated by Fiske, obviously started in America with the Founding Fathers. And, when these men got in office they did everything in their power to increase their power as well as financial stature. A classic example of this is the life and Presidency of James K. Polk. Article 5 The eleventh President of the United States, Polk was a Jeffersonian Democrat, which meant he was a strong believer of the freedom of speech and that the press was the best defense against a tyrannical government. He also believed in small business and small government, just like Thomas Jefferson. The irony of this is that both men, Jefferson and Polk, played historically the largest part in increasing the size and power of our nation’s government. His strong belief in expansionism later became referred to as Manifest Destiny. On this stance, Polk won the Presidential election and became the first and only member of the House of Representatives ever to become the President of the United States. Polk was such a proponent of expansionism that he attempted to buy Cuba while in office. In 1848, he and the ambassador to Spain, Romulus Mitchell Sanders made plans to negotiate with Spain. They offered the Spanish government 100 million dollars. Spain rejected this offer. Many countries were undoubtedly aware of Polk’s ambitions. Polk established a large majority of Oregon as part of the United States. At one point after Jackson had resigned, the Whigs had completely taken over congress and the White house. It was very similar to the way the Republicans controlled the Capital, the White House, and the Supreme Court. They were a new wave radical political party, but they faltered in their true lack of support for expanding the nation. It was through the ideals of Manifest Destiny (Expansionism), that Polk was able to claim is place as the Democratic candidate and eventually claim the Presidency. It should be noted that Polk was a long shot. It is not very clear why the majority of his opposition at the time didn’t support expansionism, but their opposition to that simple stance catapulted Polk into office. Many say if it was not for his devout expansionist ideals, he may never have won the election. The Democratic Party was not widely known for fallowing expansionism. In truth it is a more republican ideal. Or at least what we would consider to be Republican today. Polk’s presidency has been categorized as the most successful, because of all of the power and land he accumulated for his country. Polk is the prime example of a presidential tradition to increase the power of Federal government while appearing to weaken the ramifications of its hold on the people. This is a tradition that has survived, beyond the public eye, in America to this day. Article Six (Interview) The final part of my research is an interview I found with Professor Erin Belieu published by the Academy of Achievement. In it she voices her views on the American dream and the social politics of America. As much as some might like to believe this has no connection with success in America, the socioeconomic nature of our society is intertwined in everything we do. What has the American Dream meant to you? Belieu: When it comes to the American Dream, we must remember that the full racial and intellectual integration of this country is dependant on the determination of its citizens. The dream to me means quality of life. It means simply asking oneself, how do I want my life to feel? Are we moving as quickly as you might like in that direction? Belieu: Things are more like they are now than they have ever been. That said, we continue to grow more conscientious of social awareness. You don't get negative about the negative things. Belieu: No, I don't. I try to not think of the things we can’t control. I often think if we continue to work with positive attitudes, conditions will be better for more people. But, this is not a common occurrence in our society. Tell me about your husband. Rosa Parks: He was a great man who promoted equality as much as I do today. But he is in a better place. He was an inspiration to you. Belieu: Yes, he was. When did he die? Belieu: In August of 1989 What advice would you give to a young person who wants to make a difference? Belieu: The advice I would give the youth today is, first of all, to avoid prejudice against other people and to be concerned about what they can do to help others. And of course, to learn as much as possible, and use all the advantages there are today, particularly the web. In fact, there are more opportunities today than when I was young. And whatever they do, to be positive and show concern for others, most importantly to avoid drugs and substances that will destroy the physical health, as well as mental health. What would you say to a kid who's in trouble now? Belieu: The reason we start with them so young is to try to get them a good family life, before they get into that area. Of course there are those who maybe have strayed away, and I would certainly advise them to find some means of helping themselves, even if they've gotten into some problems. Family is important to you. Belieu: Yes, it is, very important. Of course, we have so many broken homes now. Young people need some means of motivation and to try to find some role models, people in school, in church, and other organizations. They need to be organized, instead of being so scattered about and not having any positive outlook on life. What I Learned After doing this assignment, the main thing I have learned is that when it comes to success in America one doesn’t have to reinvent the wheel. There are many different successful Americans one can use as examples. But, the example they set is not based on what they might deem is the source of their success, but the actions they take. A Key sign of success the promotion of the values of public perception, and as Pierre Bourdieu points out this perception does not truly exist. One should never fall blindly for the values presented by the American Dream, but instead use the reality it disregards to read between the lines in our society. Being mentally aware of the messages the social elite wish to portray is the first step to success in America. This is a harsh reality, but one that can guard me in my professional life. Work Cited Bourdieu, Pierre. (1984) Distinction, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Fiske, John (1987) Television Culture, London: Methuen. Hamilton, L. David. Stereotype-Based Expectancies 1990. Journal of social issues 8 Dec. 2006 Krawczynksi, Keith "The U.S. Constitution and the Declaration of Independence." History in Dispute, Vol. 12: The American Revolution, 1763-1789., ed. St. James Press, 2003. Reproduced in History Resource Center. Farmington Hills, MI: Gale Nagel, Joane. American Indian Ethnic Renewal Red Power and the Resurgence of Identity and Culture. Oxford UP, 1996. Constructing Ethnic Identity. 8 Dec. 2006. Simons, Jon (1997) ªThe Dialectics of Diana as Empty Signifierº , Theory & Event, 1(4). http: //muse.jhu.edu/journals/theory_and_event Simons, Jon (2000) Ideology, Imagology, and Critical Thought: The Impoverishment of Politics, Journal of Political Ideology, 5(1), 81± 103 Standing Up For Freedom. (2006). Interview with Rosa Parks. Academy of Achievment. Read More