Coining the Dream

I’ve always felt that there was more than just one way of looking at the American Dream, but it’s not something that people often talk about or speculate on. I’ve felt that there are different aspects, different sides, different perspectives based off of people’s positions in society. Now finally, the chance for conversation has opened, so let’s chat shall we?
Walter Fisher, professor and writer of “Reaffirmation and Subversion of the American Dream”, saw this dual sided aspect of the American Dream during the presidential election of 1972 between Nixon and McGovern. In this he saw the two sides of the dream: the materialistic view and the moralistic view. The materialistic view is, of course, associated with wealth, success, high paying occupations, the ability to purchase a home, and the like, while the moralistic view is typically associated with freedom, equality, equal opportunity, and other American Values.
In Fisher’s eyes, the American Dream is a myth/dream that all in the United States share to some degree, which defines our culture. He explains that  the function of dreams and myths are to “provide meaning, identity, a comprehensible understanding of the world, and to support the social order.” In America, success and high occupational standing are values held highly in society; going to college, buying a home, and putting in hard work every day are all part of the American social order that is upheld through the American dream. People feel that they have purpose when they have a goal in mind, which the American dream provides through its perpetuation of success. And this was something that Nixon had often spoken of, of hard work and effort put forth by the citizenry.
Fisher also claims that, at times, people assume that with two aspects of the dream, one must be good while the other is ultimately “bad”, but both are equally based in traditional american values. He states that “in the 1972 presidential election that McGovern preached what Americans profess in principle and that Nixon preached what most Americans practice in their everyday lives.” Again, Nixon often spoke of the values of hard work in society, and striving for success and advancement. McGovern, from what I could gather, was more into the idealistic and moralistic values, such as equality and freedom. Both have their own aspect of the American Dream that they represent; both differ in many respects, yet still come to somewhat of a mutual understanding in the importance of American values.
The American dream is by no means one sided. Like a coin, there are two sides of the whole that are distinct from one another, yet still part of one overarching thing. Some may focus more on one side than the other, but the fact remains that both still hold their place within each and every one of us. We cannot deny one without denying the whole, and we cannot have one without the other. Both exist in harmony.

Don't Criticise Our Tea

I’ll never forget the time I saw an interaction between and American and a person from the U.K., and they argued about tea. The idea of iced tea was apparently very strange to the guy from the U.K., but to the American it was a normal thing; hot tea, cold tea, even bottled tea, all normal to us, but to other parts of the world the latter two were very odd.
    And so too are other American products, concepts and ideas. To us they’re completely normal but to those outside of America… not so much.
    Gary Althen in his book American Ways: A Guide for Foreigners in the United States, and more specifically in the chapter titled “American Values and Assumptions”, lists some of the many oddities of American behavior and culture, such as our practice of individualism and application of equality. He sheds light on the general nature of Americans, and it honestly isn’t the great image we usually think of.
    Americans like to support the idea of living for oneself, determining your own future and the path you’ll take in life, looking out for your well being over anyone else’s, breaking away from the close knit family unit to pursue your own destiny. It’s often encouraged for teens to try to become independent, and ultimately be ready to live on their own once they turn 18. Many move out to live in a college dorm, or share an apartment with other students, and this has become a norm here in the States. But for other countries this break of traditional families is very strange.
    I grew up with a Filipino mother, and from what I’ve gathered family is extremely important to them. In the Philippines poverty is much more widespread, so often times family units had to be tight knit to be able to survive; parents and children had to work together if they wanted to live. There it was very common for kids to do housework or even get small jobs in order to lighten the load for their parents. Conversely, parents would wish for and strive towards the advancement of their children, trying to give them better and more successful lives than what they grew up with.
    And that’s not the only thing that sets Americans apart from others in the world. Our hypocritical belief in and practice of equality also make us seem very strange to the rest of the world. We claim to support equality, boasting about how (almost) everyone here has equal rights protected under the law even though many of those rights weren’t given until just a few decades ago. We believe that there is no glass ceiling for any group, or discrimination towards a race or marginalized group; Americans really do believe everyone is equal now.
    We are not.
    As we’ve seen in recent months, there are still major conflicts between white americans and colored peoples; between different political parties and groups.
    With the LGBTQ+ community for example, we (yes I am a part of it) still face subtle oppressions that should not exist where there is “equality”. Gays and lesbians can’t walk the streets hand in hand as straight couples do; those in the trans community have suffered battles over which bathroom they get to use, intersex individuals often times grow up as someone who they aren’t because of forced gender assignment by doctors when they are born. Homosexuals and trans individuals do not have the same access to healthcare, housing opportunities, police aid, job opportunities, and more, simply because they do not conform to the normal standards people are used to. The United States wouldn’t even sign a bill condemning the death penalty for homosexuals in some countries.
    America is still far from equal, but we don’t often see it. Nowadays some are more open to the idea that we are not truly equal, though more progress can be made.
    Let’s face it, America ain’t all its cracked up to be and we know it. To other countries we’re odd and hypocritical; to ourselves we either think we’re the greatest or agree with outsiders.
    But hey, at least we’ve got our iced tea.

I'm Not *Qualified* to Talk About This, but...

I’m not very good at reading dense works.

I lose focus, my eyes wander away from the text, and suddenly I find myself thinking “gee I wonder what it would be like if people could independently move every hair on their bodies”.

… yeah I know that’s weird but that’s just how my brain is sometimes. Try not to dwell on that too much (trust me, it leads to even weirder questions).

Moving on from that, I found Teresa Thonney’s work “Teaching the Conventions of Academic Discourse” to be… challenging. Of course, it was targeted at and intended for academics and scholarly folks who can actually read or listen to things like this without letting their minds wander to strange places. For some college students it’s pretty challenging to sit down and avidly read this kind of text without simultaneously playing music or videos as background noise, or stopping every few minutes to check their phones even when they know there’s been absolutely no change.

Yes I am guilty of this.

No it’s not bad if you are too.

But for me personally, I could still find interest in Thonney discussed because I love to write. I’m more of a fictional writer myself, occasionally doing some social commentaries or poems, or whatever else I’m in the mood for (and those are all just for fun). Talks about writing of any kind manage to pique my interest about ⅔ of the time, primarily because I’m always looking to improve my writing. I mean seriously, if I can find tips on how to write consistently or overcome writer’s block I shoot over the moon.

You’d understand my sentiments if you had 5 or so stories that haven’t moved–

For 3

YEARS.

But enough about that, let’s get back to Thonney.

It was a difficult read, but a good read. However, for college students who need to be able to put out essays and reports of a high academic level, a reading like this which explains some of the fundamentals of being an academic writer could be crucial to writing higher level papers that their professors may expect of them. Despite the difficulties that come with an academic text like this, it was made a little easier to read as Thonney broke paragraphs down to make the text less dense, and formatted it to create a sort of outline for what would be addressed when. For me, doing these made it a bit easier to read and process, which I liked.

Some of the academic writers and works she referenced throughout the text also helped to make it a little more interesting, as they provided examples for what she herself explained.

The text is most basically broken down into 7 sections, 6 of the 7 focusing on things academic writers do, and the last providing a list of tips and advice for students.  One of these sections was on acknowledgement of different positions. Nowadays, when the idea of freedom of speech and expression are constantly perpetuated and defended, allowing for most everyone to have and form their own opinions, it’s important for writers of any level to understand that others will not always agree with them, and that’s entirely normal. To address the possibility of disagreements, most writers make use of qualifiers to subtly include other perspectives, or at least acknowledge their existence.

In fact, I just used one there. “Most writers”. Because of course not every writer will use qualifiers, but for the most part academics will.

Using qualifiers can be crucial to students, especially when making claims or arguments about aspects of society, humanity, or another potentially controversial topics. It’s important to know how to structure any statements you make so they don’t lose their effectiveness by making an argument that wrongly makes a blanket statement over the whole of the topic.

For example, saying that feminists are women would be a weak claim since it assumes that all feminists are women. A much stronger statement would be to say that a majority of feminists are women, since this acknowledges that not every feminist is a woman, but that many are.

… I’m taking women’s studies ok? Got feminism on the brain.

And I see qualifiers used often in the texts we read for the course. They’re used often, and very effective when used correctly. Qualifiers could create pathos or logos appeals, depending on which topics they're being used for and which qualifiers are used. Ultimately it's all a matter of fact and opinion, and differentiating between the two.

In my opinion Thonney's piece was a tough read, but I also think it was worth reading.

Savings over Solidarity

Another day, another blog post, another discussion of the American education system, because I’ve somehow become obsessive about the topic after reading this book.

Thanks Chomsky.

But really, I appreciate the validation of some ideas that had briefly passed my mind many times in the past. Public schools get attacked, education is constructed in a way that builds up memorization more than actual learning and development of skills, and kids are drugged up to increase their performance like body-builders trying to increase their muscle mass. And of course any children who can’t meet the standards are funneled into lower level jobs because that’s all anyone believes they can accomplish.

So here we are now in Chapter 5, talking about solidarity in relation to public education. Chomsky asserts that “We see it in the attack on public schools. Public schools are based on the principle of solidarity.” (66). In other words, public schools are run on the principle of caring for others, since public schools are run by government funding, which is derived from taxes on citizenry. When people pay their taxes, they fuel public schools so children can continue to get their education. But, unfortunately, the idea of solidarity is not ingrained in the mind of every tax payer, so America ends up with a group that supports privatization of education so that they don’t have to pay taxes to fuel kids that aren’t their own.

There’s a loss of certain human emotions that leads people to have these self-centered ideas. “I don’t have kids in public schools so my tax money shouldn’t go to public schools.” This is the sentiment that has begun to develop, according to Chomsky (no those are not his words but this is the basic idea).

Since education is such a major aspect of the American Dream which Chomsky seems to believe is dead or dying, the knowledge that it’s come under attack in recent years reflects pretty negatively on the dream. Using examples, rhetorical questions, and clever implementation of irony, he puts emphasis and support into the idea that public education, and in a larger scope the American Dream, are being attacked.

Through exemplification on page 66, Chomsky creates a sort of pathos appeal by drawing out feelings of anger, frustration, even betrayal for some. With the hypothetical american perspective presented, where an average citizen suddenly thinks ‘“I don’t have kids in school. Why should I pay taxes? Privatize it,”’ (66), youths who have just come out of that school system or are still in that school system would likely be hurt by such thoughts.

I mean, how could they not care about our education? They’re just so selfish, aren’t they?

And how about that ending statement, “That’s one of the jewels of America.” (67). How ironic that a growing wish for privatization of education to cut down some taxes would be likened to a jewel. A precious gem. Something that should bring thoughts of beauty to our minds.

Gotta love irony and sarcasm!

And so our passions are ignited; passions for a system of solidarity, of selflessness and support for our fellow man. Our eyes are opened to the brokenness of the current system and we find ourselves wishing for a solution. By creating these emotional appeals and drawing out hidden sentiment Chomsky garners support for this claim. 

After all, who wouldn’t agree with something after becoming so emotional about it?

An Emotional Tirade Over American Education

Don’t you just love it when people are willing to speak the truth about American institutions like the educational system, the economic system, and our system of government? When people speak out against various wrongs and injustices in our system without sugarcoating anything?
    Me too!
    And thank goodness for a guy like Noam Chomsky who does just that.
    In his book Requiem for the American Dream, he makes bold statements about everything wrong with American democracy and, well, America in general. Statements that, until you see or hear them, tend to go right over your head because you think “Nooo, America is waaaay better than that! Educational systems aren’t that shallow. Systems aren’t that corrupt.”
    It’s a hard pill to swallow but yes, my friends, it is that corrupt (score one for the pessimists).
    Let’s start with a glance at his views of the educational system, which I’d say is most relevant to us since we’re college students. Looking back, you can see the indoctrination he sheds light on from pages 19 to 21, as well as on pages 30 to 31. It starts in grade school, where students are tailored to memorize a certain set of skills that help them pass a test rather than learning concepts and skills that can actually be applied to life. At this time some are still allowed the youthful creativity that comes with being a child.
    Then middle school and high school hit you, and suddenly your creativity is sapped away. It becomes all about taking higher level classes, achieving higher test scores to make the school rank highly, being a super-student getting involved in school and sports and outdoor activities all while balancing the need to complete busywork so you can get straight A’s.
    Because B’s will never be good enough.
    Because C’s and D’s imply that the system is working just fine but you aren’t.
    Now in that, I understand that there are kids who just don’t try, hence the poor grades, but perhaps their unwillingness to put in the effort is also a reflection of a broken educational system. After all, if there are “doctors who give drugs to children in impoverished areas to try to improve their performance, knowing perfectly well that there’s nothing wrong with the children–there’s something wrong with the society,” (21). If a child has to be pumped full of drugs just to succeed in school, perhaps that school isn’t structured in a way to help them succeed through their own abilities. Perhaps society has purposely created an educational natural selection to weed out the kids who can’t stack up so only the “best” students get to achieve what every student is meant to achieve; so that the supposedly damaged kids who can’t perform will be sorted into menial jobs that nobody wants while the straight A’s and honor students get a shot at greatness.
    I know because I’ve lived it. I’ve seen friends expelled because they couldn’t fit into the schools standards; intelligent people flunking out of high school or college because they couldn’t meet the school's expectations.
    Because in American schools our intelligence and skills are most often not measured. It is our ability to follow orders that is tested.
    We continue to support a system that doesn’t support all of us; some still live with the remnants of the “separate but equal” clause because the majority of America is too slow and complacent to acknowledge that it’s still an issue today; kids can no longer aspire to be artists or musicians or dancers or anything creative because those occupations do not meet the American expectations.
    Why do I find this so problematic?
    Why is it that broken educational systems and stymied creativity are so important to me?
    This is my life. This was my dream, to pursue the arts in the country where I believed as a child that I could.
    Here I am now, pursuing environmental engineering because I was told artists can almost never be successful. Because I was made to feel like my art and writing wasn’t good enough to stack up to the greats.
    Here I am unable to get my creative juices to flow as they did 10, 8, even 5 years ago.
    I know what Chomsky says about the broken system is true, but despite my mostly pessimistic outlook on life I hope for a day where my future children won’t live with this.
    I want to believe that one day, we can change the systems that control us for the better.

FALLACIES FALLACIES FALLACIES!

    Did ya’ll know there are wild parrots in Pasadena that just fly around in little flocks like it’s no big deal? Or that there’s a street in the same area filled with peacocks that just casually walk around or chill on top of people’s houses like they own the place?
    Weird right?
    Having these strange, exotic, colorful birds living in neighborhoods that aren’t even rich enough to afford such luxurious animals as pets makes you think of them as being out of place, right?
    And so brings on the topic of fallacies, which are essentially faulty reasoning in arguments that can render said arguments invalid. Fallacies, like these exotic birds in Pasadena, really don’t belong in arguments. Rebecca Jones in her essay “Finding the Good Argument OR Why Bother With Logic” identifies them as problems within argument. But why are fallacies so problematic? According to Jones a fallacious argument “can result in a standoff rather than a solution,” and “pose real ethical problems” (pg 18, pdf).
    For example: I once voiced my opinions on suicide and mental issues online. As you can probably predict, it didn’t go well. I tried to be an advocate for a group of people being rudely insulted and harassed, and rather than engaging in a conversation of course those doing the harassing turned on me and met my arguments with fallacies. They didn’t care what points I made or raised, they simply insulted me in whatever ways they could.
    “I bet you’re autistic just like these (insert curse word here because cursing on this blog post might be a bad idea)”
    “You’re only defending them because you’re as retarded as they are.”
    “You only spoke up because you want people to think you’re better than us. You speak the way you do because you do think you’re better than us!”
    There was plenty more where that come from but you get the idea. This, my friends, is ad hominem, a type of fallacy that addresses the person rather than the argument the person makes. If you need another example think of two politicians debating only to resort to negatively commenting on each other’s appearances.
    It makes you seem a little weaker, don’t you think? Like you can’t meet the level of argument they make so you fall back on cheap tactics to try to bring them down to your level.
    Let’s consider another one. I once heard a story of a woman going to a metal concert and being verbally harassed by some… well, creeps (not even going to try to sugar coat that one). When she wasn’t looking one of them pulled her top down and shoved her into a huge group of  large, intense looking metal heads. You’d see this and automatically assume most of them would either join in on the action and jump her, stand by and watch it happen as they oggle her, or not pay attention and basically stomp on her. But the exact opposite happened; they helped her up and covered her, with one even helping her fix her shirt; what’s more, two of the gentle giants asked who did it and proved to be not so gentle in dealing with him.
    If that doesn’t restore some or your faith in humanity I don’t know what else to tell you.
    Now, the fallacy I gave an example of was simply known as jumping to conclusions. “Since they’re male metalheads, and metalheads often have tough looking appearances, they must be violent.” Making such assumptions with little to no reason behind them makes for weak arguments and major ethical issues. It’s proven to be quite offensive to. A more extreme example would be assuming that every illegal immigrant from Mexico is a rapist, murderer, or drug-pusher.
    Offensive.
    These are just two of many possible fallacies that people use daily. At times, fallacies can be harmless, like in wrongly jumping to the conclusion that maroon isn’t dark red because maroon isn’t called dark red. But as Jones says about one of Aristotle's works, “he claims that everything good can be used for harm, so rhetoric is no different from other fields.” Arguments can be used for good, and are used for good, but even they are subject to misuse by humanity. The fact that they are intangible doesn’t make them immune to humanity's ability to turn something good into an instrument for harm. We’ve seen it used throughout history for bad intentions; during times of war and peace, when the country is unified or divided, through racism, sexism, classism, and whatever other isms I can’t think of at this moment, arguments have been used for the good and not-so-good.
    Humanity as a whole will never progress if we continue to use argument this way, especially since argument is so essential in a civilized society. So, how do we fix it?
    How do we get rid of these fallacies and other harmful tools within argument?
    It starts with families; with parents teaching their kids that making harsh and baseless assumptions is wrong; with parents making sure their kids know that people will have different opinions and that is perfectly acceptable; with parents teaching their kids little by little how to be civil and not insulting.
It starts in schools teaching students how to debate and argue properly; with teachers showing students the rights and wrongs in argument and reinforcing those teachings; with students engaging with each other in friendly conversation; with students and staff creating a safe environment where opinions can be voiced without fear of judgement or attack.
    It starts with us, breaking the cycle.

OH LOOK A PUPPY

    So, now that I have your attention, let's get down to some real talk. We all know about the American dream; we’ve heard about it, read about it, blogged about it, but why is it so significant? How did it come to be? How is it still persisting in American society after all these years?

    If you expect me to answer those questions I’m not going to. For one thing it’s going to be different for everyone since everyone is looking through different lenses, seeing from unique perspectives, coming from different backgrounds. Plus, that’s not my goal here. If you want answers you can find them in The American Dream in the 21st Century, a compendium edited by Sandra Hanson and John White. Within its chapters you will find the writings of many respectable folks providing their views on the American Dream.

    And no this is not a book report.

    See, there was a certain section within this book that I found rather interesting–well, 3 small sections actually, but let’s just lump them together by referencing pages 8-10. Here you can see 3 smaller separate paragraphs set apart from the rest of the text, listing various responses to certain aspects of the American Dream. Of course, what immediately stands out is the repeated mention of freedom, equality, equal opportunity, success, security, etcetera etcetera. What really caught my attention was the idea of educational opportunity and educational advancement.

    Why? Because I’m the first in my family to go straight into a 4 year university after high school.

    In this day and age having a great education can make or break you; the importance of getting a college degree in order to get a good job with a stable income is emphasized again and again. I especially hear it from my mother, a wonderful little Filipino woman who dreamed of getting a college degree but could only make it as far as high school because of her family’s financial situation. My father was quite similar in the sense that he was never able to get to college, and instead joined the Navy. Luckily for him he was able to ascend to high positions after retiring, and makes a more than stable income. Because of this my parents reiterated time and time again that we 3 kids had to go to college so we would live better lives than they did.

    My brother and sister didn’t quite listen.

    Instead, they started working in retail or restaurant jobs, only to realize later that it wasn’t paying them enough for them to be satisfied. So my sister, the oldest of us, started trying to get her degree; 11 years later she earned her degree in Communications while racking up a whopping debt of some amount I don’t quite remember (it would make your wallet cry though). My brother, on the other hand, didn’t bother with school and just kept working hard; 11 years later and he’s struggling to pay bills and make ends meet.

    I was the youngest, and often called “the good kid” who listened to mommy and daddy and did what I was told. I took the higher level courses in high school. I focused on my studies. I took advantage of as many opportunities as I could and I made it; I got into one of the toughest schools in California to get into, on track with units already complete to pursue a degree in Engineering.

    Despite the odds stacked against me I made it, and that is what’s so important about this section. 

    That it speaks of people’s American Dreams being linked to getting a good education, or paving that path for their children. It speaks of a desire to succeed, a desire for future generations to live relatively comfortably, a desire for the educational opportunities that didn’t exist in the past, a desire for financial security in a world where good finances are practically everything, a desire for a better future.

    This was the American Dream for my parents.

    This is the American Dream I hold for the children I will have some day.

    This is one aspect the Dream I live, and it’s important that everyone know that they can too.

    After all, White and Hanson stated on page 8 while introducing the idea of equal opportunity “the American Dream endures [because] it has been closely intertwined with deeply held American values, especially freedom and opportunity.”

    The opportunities are there; it’s a matter of whether or not we’ll seek them.

    Thanks for reading, have a dappertato

Fluidity of American Dreams

Often times it seems to me that the general interpretation of the American Dream is getting a good education, followed by a stable job, and eventually buying a home to start a family. But this idea of the American Dream has become outdated as times and demographics have changed. Sure, you’ve still got the cut and dry individuals that fit into the type described above, but like american races and ethnicities, ideas of what the american dream is are diverse; there is no one set definition that applies to all. Rather, the meaning continues to change and evolve as times ticks on.
    In the article “American Dreams” from the New York Times (July 1, 2016), this couldn’t be more evident. From the get go we see from the perspective of a woman who descends from african american slaves, whose desires are by no means wealth centered or success centered, but human rights centered. Weah expressed the dream and desire for nothing more than equal rights; for the ability of americans to pursue the famous phrase of “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” This dream goes beyond herself to other americans. Yes, other americans. And she wasn’t the only one either. Many other individuals who took part in this study held similar sentiments; wanting a safe place for people of all walks for life, wanting to reach out to those suffering from drug abuse and save them, wishing to empower one’s community, doing honest work to ensure that those who receive your products are satisfied, wanting everyone to be advocated for in the world, these are just a handful of the american dreams shared by others. And all of these are concerned with matters beyond the self.
    I mean, who even thinks of other people’s advancement before their own? That’s just plain crazy!
    All joking aside, the fact that so many of the individuals dreamt and hoped for something better for all people and not just themselves is pretty heartwarming. The mere thought that someone else is thinking of you is pleasant in and of itself, but knowing that complete strangers are wishing for your happiness? Your success? Your safety and acceptance? That can be life altering.
    And if people aren’t dreaming about every single good thing possible for every single person, then they’re dreaming of personal growth. Taking on challenge after challenge, learning and growing along the way; pushing oneself to the very limit to become stronger as a person; to become self sufficient, and unreliant on the materialistic and capitalistic values of society; to live freely as one desires rather than feeling the need to conform to the expectations of society; to rebuild one's life not only for one's own sake, but also for the sake of those around them.
    I can’t help but admire these people for having such positive goals and dreams in mind. They aren’t solely focused on making money and buying a house, they’re thinking more deeply with desires for positive growth, both on an individual level and on a nationwide level.
    After reading this article I’ve found that my own perception of the American Dream has changed, as has my personal dream. My american dream is for a world of tolerance, and acceptance. A world where people can step back and look at everything that's going wrong and try to find a way to make it right again. A world where people can live the lives they want without fear of judgement or being attacked, so long as that lifestyle doesn't involve hurting themselves and/or others. A world where people can coexist with this planet and the life all around us instead of destroying for the sake of expansion. I dream of a world where people could keep an open mind, and be accepting of change and progress rather than trying to go back to "the good old days".
    I dream of love.