Talk:American Dream

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
United States Portal
This article is within the scope of the United States WikiProject. This project provides a central approach to United States-related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale. See comments
Peer review American Dream has had a peer review by Wikipedia editors which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

Contents

[edit] Hochschild References

In the section quoting from and relying on Hochschild, what are the parenthetical numbers supposed to represent? Are these pages in Hochschild's book? And it seems to me that the 'flaw' in this part:

Question How does one pursue success? Answer- “through actions and traits under one’s own control”(18). Flaws Ignores the fact that if one may claim responsibility for success one must accept responsibility for failure. Therefore people who fail are presumed to lack talent or will (30).

is that the stated flaw is exactly backwards. Rather than ignoring that one must accept responsibility for failure, the belief in question requires it. What it ignores is the role myriad other circumstances, such as race, class, and dumb luck, have in both success and failure. Then it follows that people who hold this belief would also therefore believe that those who fail are morally responsible for that outcome. Natcolley (talk) 04:27, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Point of this Article

The point of this article is to define and explain the American dream. Since it is a concept, this article should not pose arguments on either side (claiming that the American Dream is successful or unsuccessful). This concept is abstract, so there is no specific dream. This article is an attempt to explain how the american dream of free economic choice led to large-scale immigration, and what caused the flourishing of the American Dream.
Let's inform readers what the AD is about, the history behind it, etc....they can form an opinion for themselves.

[edit] Major Changes

This page is in need of some serious help.

1. Everything from Immigration down needs to undergo serious revision. These sections seem to lose focus of defining and describing the American dream.
2. Remove the paragraph about the cabbie success story. Keep the reference as an example, and link it to an article about him, possibly having one or two sentences that sum up his rags to riches transition. This article is not the place for a short biography. Done.
3. I'm not so sure that the image of American income is exactly necessary. While the American Dream does have something to do with income, there is not exactly a set income at which you are now living the American dream
4. This page should include, since it is inextricably tied and mentioned in the opener, how the Bill of Rights, Capitalism, and Meritocracy have hampered, helped, whatever...the American Dream
5. A lot of the last part is irrelevant. The Dot com boom, Computer crap...it needs to be weeded out and removed. This is where most of the problem lies. I took care of a lot of this...however, the paragraph about hippie ideals, etc, needs some review.

--FivePointCalvinist (My Friends Call me 'Cal') 21:42, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Higher Education

Under Criticisms, there is a whole point based on Higher Education, stating that Higher Education "can" be expensive. While this is true, this is no basis for an argument because higher education "can" be inexpensive. Heck, cars "can" be expensive, yet that hasn't stopped Americans from having a national average of about 1 car per person....

--- I really don't understand your point? A good education helps you to get a good job. If you can't afford the best education, you won't be able to get the best jobs. Most Americans might be able to afford a car, but how many can afford a porsche. Likewise, most Americans might find it easy to afford to go to college, but very few can afford the fees for an Ivy League college without a scholarship. Therefore the best educations, and by extension many of the best jobs, are reserved for the children of the rich.

---While this is true, I think this person's argument is that you don't need an "expensive" education to live the American dream, so this can't exactly be a criticism of the American dream

It is possible to get a good college education on the cheap. I did my first two years at a community college then transferred to a relatively unknown 4-year school. What I didn't have I borrowed. I went toe to toe with ivy league graduates. Good schools don't make you smart it's just that smart people go there. Anyone that wants a college education can get one if they have the chops, and that is part of what the American dream is about.

[edit] Doesn't make sense

I removed "This ideal is closely related to Horatio Algerism.", because it doesen't make sense. Mhocker 06:09, 13 September 2006 (UTC) I thought american education is equal. If American education would be equal, then they will help anybody who resides in the United States to continue their education. My friend, juan, 21 year old, smart guy, is having difficulties to get the money he needs for his books and tuition because he was brought into this country illegal. He's probably going to drop off, he has a a 3.5 gpa. He needs the financial support. He doesn't receive financial aid because "he's illegal" because his parents brought him to this country. He had no choice. America is not equal in terms of giving financial aid and education to those who deserve an education. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.189.228.4 (talk) 21:45, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Citation needed

Thanks to user User:Ertyqway for flagging all the unattributed statements that need referencing. I think that at some point, any unattributed statements should be removed. The flags were posted on Sept 1, 2006. --Docmgmt 17:53, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] What I have done

I have made signifigant edits to this mess, particularily multiple edits to the criticisms section. If you take issue with any of my edits, or think I missed something major, tell me under this heading.--Vaergoth 30 June 2005 12:22 (UTC)

Uh yeah... i see absolutely nothing under the heading "criticism"

Hi, I put each of the criticisms as its own bullet point. --Docmgmt 22:01, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
Wikifying the criticism. I have since done some editing on the various criticisms, expanding some, adding one about social justice, refining some of the criticisms and some of the counter points. I'm concerned that not all of the criticisms or counter-arguments are attibutable, (although as I read them, various quotes come to mind) but I think that implementing linked headings like Social Justice or Social Control or Social Darwinism will allow others to read up on the expanded points if they so choose. --Docmgmt 19:07, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The poor are ******* stupid?

Am I only one who find the following part quite offensive? Yes. I am rich. "...the American dream also ignores other factors of success such as...inheritable traits such as intelligence."

What? Am I reading this wrong or is it implying that people are poor because they are stupid? No they put it in a question format they did not want u to take it like that ---

I believe the implication is a different one: People who a poor and less intellectually gifted will find it difficult to escape poverty by means of work alone. However, it is possible to be poor for many other reasons as well.

Although somewhat controversial, you may find it interesting to read Wikipedia's article on intelligence quotient, where the fraction of people living in poverty is compared to their score on a standardized IQ test. It drops from around 30% among those with the lowest scores to only 2% among those with the highest.

Filur 01:24, 15 May 2005 (UTC)

That is justified. People who have a low IQ will find it hard to have the 'American Dream'. --Nukethewales 14:58, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Can" is the key word here

Some of you seem to miss the word "can" in the opening sentence. Contrary to what has been posted below, the dream does not involve *everyone* in the country getting rich. If that were true, it would suggest that people in America are entitled to wealth because they live here. That misses the point entirely. I deleted a paragraph in the criticism section that reflected this inaccurate viewpoint.

The gist of the American dream is that if you work sufficiently hard, you CAN be a success--not that you're guaranteed to do so. The point is that in other places (like, say, North Korea) you do not have that opportunity. You could work your butt off until the cows come home in Pyongyang and you still ain't getting rich. The American dream is related to the general idea of freedom--that you're free to make your own economic decisions, and that maybe, if you play your cards right, you'll make it big.

I may be wrong hear, but i don't think this is true. I have lived in US and have heard this dream a couple of times. And in all cases, the speaker was implying this applies to everyone. And if this doesn't apply to everyone, then its not unique to America at all. Luck my friend is universal. For example, i am Kenyan and can name a number of people born poor but ended up filthy rich. An example is Josiah Mwangi Kariuki. One more thing, your chance for being rich depend with how ethical you are. The more ethical you are, the more remote your chance of getting rich. Probe a couple of the rich figures around. There is one common characteristic with all of them. They were all willing to do evil, ranging from simple back stabbing to embezzlement and murder.
In fact, i even know of a primary school classmate who was really freaking rich. After leaving primary school for secondary school life, i never say him again. At that time, he was a dirt poor village boy. One day, i was reading news when i came across his name. Since i was at US then, i called home and to my surprise, my instinct was right. I was even told the guy had a huge house, numerous girlfriends and drove a Range Rover. Since he even never went to high school, i knew he must have been up to no good. He did eventually close the wrong person. I hear he had contact with one of the Rwanda's criminals. (That imply he was working with him, as i can see how else he came to know this criminal) He approached the USA embassy and offered to assist them catch him(the criminal) in return for money. Someone buggled it up and he ended up with a bullet in the head. This is the story i am refering to. [1]
In short, as recently as two years ago, someone in Kenya had managed to go from rugs to riches. Granted, he didn't use means that anyone should be proud of. In fact, i have no sympathy for greedy people as i think they are the root cause of the world's evil.
Surely the American Dream as a concept, well known around the World exists whether or not poor people can get rich in other countries. I thought it also referred to the large number of immigrants believing that America was a land of new oppurtunity, not only poor people already resident there. Jameskeates 09:40, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] What happens when you wake up?

Just a thought...

Then you daydream.

I can understand the thought behind this but it is very poorly written. Also, it is presumptuous to denote a single nation to this cause. SD6-Agent 01:18, 21 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Word to SD6. This is an important topic, but the entry itself is kind of dreamy, and does not attempt to define what, in fact, the American dream might be. There is value in this topic--many American studies majors have ponder the question of the American dream, but this entry needs a great deal of enrichment.

Nice dream, but here's our wake-up call:

  • (and dealt with the native Americans)
  • (and shared anew by later generations of immigrants)

We need some contrast between the airy idealism of the American Dream and the harsh realities of real history and real life. --Uncle Ed 19:16, 21 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I inserted the above parenthetical remarks as ironic comments, the page started off in a very ironic fashion, and I was surprised to see that my ironic comments ('blazing trails', _dealing _ with 'Native Americans') were built upon in the eulogistic expansion of the page. Perhaps irony is wasted in the histrionic larger than life image of the american dream? If wastedm then these remarks are better left out, but where do you stand, Ed? TonyClarke 19:40, 21 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I like irony, but find it hard to apply it in writing encyclopedia articles. Also, I think the topic of the American Dream is a worthy one.
We should describe what the American Dream is, as well as mention problems attaining it, or objections to it.
My understanding is rather vague, but as an American I feel there is some sort of shared aspiration there -- not that it shouldn't be critiqued, don't get me wrong. Just that if there's to be an article at all, it should come up to our usual standards. --Uncle Ed 20:59, 21 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Yes you are right Ed.

TonyClarke 21:50, 21 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Here's a nice quote:

For our parents and grandparents, the American dream meant hope – an unshakeable belief that happiness and security were truly possible. They knew they had a unique opportunity to make a better life for themselves and their families. That dream still exists. [2] --Uncle Ed 22:02, 21 Nov 2003 (UTC)

____

But we all have that dream, hope isn't unique to America TonyClarke 22:43, 21 Nov 2003 (UTC)

  • I'm glad at least one person, I hope you're American, has enough sense to realize hope isn't just some word exclusive to the United States.

SD6-Agent 22:51, 21 Nov 2003 (UTC)

____

Nope, sorry there boy, born and reared in Ireland. TonyClarke 23:56, 21 Nov 2003 (UTC)

But maybe to paraphrase JFK, nowadays we are all american. Silly remark, really. TonyClarke 23:58, 21 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Silly is an understatement SD6-Agent 10:05, 22 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Yes, and people thought JFK was silly when he declared himself a Berliner: but look at the place now. No offence intended.

TonyClarke 11:41, 22 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I don't even know WHO that would be offensive to! SD6-Agent 00:22, 23 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I still think this page should be deleted. It's patriotic rubbish. That definitely falls into the category of it being a candidate for VfD due to it being a biased article. SD6-Agent 04:07, 18 Feb 2004 (UTC)

This page really ought to be rewritten from scratch. It offers little to no definiton for the phrase American Dream and contains quite a bit of bias. There should still be an article on the phrase, though--not because the concept is limited to America (which it isn't), but because the phrase is in the vernacular. --Erik Carson 20:16, 2004 May 7 (UTC)

The section "Critisism of the American dream" needs to be rewritten. As it stands, it is really not a critisism at all.

The real critisim is that the American dream is false and misguided. It is not possible for everyone to become prosperous through determination and hard work. This false belief is likely to have negative consequences, such as the poor feeling that it is their fault that they are not successful, and less effort being put into raising standards for the poor since they "are all lazy" (according to one survey I saw 60% of Americans believe that the poor are poor because they are lazy, while this was true for only around 25% of Europeans).

Actually, your definition of the American dream is false and misguided. See above.

Just as important, or perhaps more important, than hard work is the family one is born into and inheritable traits such as intelligence. Although many people may think that George W. became the current US president because he worked so much harder than anyone else, a more plausible explanation is that he was born into a family of politicians. Filur 30 Jul 2004

The American dream is like a rainbow...a beautiful illusion. You think you see it; you believe that at the end of it there is your pot of gold, but if you look for it you are searching in vain. Why does America not stop searching for its 'dream' and actually do something constructive and usefel for the world? - Ruthie14 19 Nov 2004

Filur, perhaps unwittingly, showed something important about the American Dream: that it is strictly American. Social attitudes in America are different from those of the rest of the world. Beliefs about life and about history in America are different fromt hose of the rest of the world. This particular fantasy of a prosperous, suburban existence is a uniquely American one. Here there is a blend of laissez-faire capitalism and nationalistic pride that doesn't exist wherever else one looks. For better or worse, this dream was bred in America and is maintained in America.

And Ruthie would do well to recognize that there are a number of selfless Americans who do concentrate on the needs of the world over their own.Lebob 06:26, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I re-wrote the Criticism section to try to make it more NPOV. Regarding most of the material I removed, I did so because it seemed to be more of a criticism of American policy than of the American dream. It was valid criticism, but it didn't seem to belong in this particular encyclopedia entry. Please feel free to edit/re-add material. (I suggest just adding a wiki-link-- these topics must have been dealt with in other articles.) I removed the Israel/Palestine sentence because I just didn't see the connection or parallel to criticisms of the American dream. Please feel free to re-add it with information that would make it more clear. Thanks. --Ben James Ben 23:51, 2004 Dec 26 (UTC)

Ha, I hope I don't sound rude, but find your reasoning a little bit odd. You say the problem with American dream has more to do with government policy than the dream. You also insist that government policy should not be mentioned in this article. Its like saying someone shouldn't mention about gravity when discussing why water doesn't flow upstream. How else can one explain critism, other than mentioning factors that make the concept impracticle? [3]


The American Dream is something that only Americans can possess. I'm sorry to inform you of this fact. It is not only a reflection of our wonderful American values, but it is also a statement of being proud to be an American. I am so sorry that all of you foreigners are mad because you cannot share in this dream.

God Bless America and nowhere else!

[edit] The American Dream revealed

The American Dream is a dream of a better life, with more freedom and more OPPORTUNITY. For any American, there a potential for he or she to become rich. How? All anyone has to do is make the right choices. Choices that will bring him finacial success. For example, anyone in America has the opportunity to buy a McDonalds franchise. Everyone in America has access to the same oppertunities. That's the basis of equal freedoms. The difference is that most people who find out about the franchise would ignore it.

Here's an example. Two middle class people with equal incomes and $70,000 savings. The first person reads that the paper and thinks:

"Hmmm... Nah! I don't have enough money to buy that. I'd have to get into debt. And what if the franchise fails?!? Then I'd have a lot of debt and not enough income!! Better not take the risk and live my employee life. Besides, I want to buy that new car I was saving up for."

The second person, however, invests in the franchise with his $70,000. He gets a $600,000 morgage on the franchise. He manages the franchise, and at first the franchise isn't making enough profit cover the morgage. But the franchise makes a come around and starts making a profit. He hires a manager and the franchise is no longer consuming his time. Now he earns money, even though he isn't working. It's because he owns the franchise, and the franchise is making money on its own (thanks to the hard working employees who make him money every time they sell a burger) The value of the franchise goes up to 1.3 million dollars, and he decides to sell it. He now has $700,000 dollars in his pocket. He took the risk of investing and it paid off. Greedy people are NOT more likely to become rich. Being cheap is not the only way of becoming rich (there are much faster ways). They don't break the law or use corruption. Most poeple who try are caught right away, or relatively soon because people notice the rich. The rich are rich because they've made and continue to make good investments.

I'm not getting how this example uniquely American. There are plenty of free/open/market/unplanned economies on the planet. A thousand years before Washington ever even thought of chopping down that cherry tree, a Mongolian goat-herd could make a pretty nice life for himself if he made and continued to make good choices about where to pasture, etc. Hard work and a little faith in the Ancient Mongolian Dream, my boy, and you could have a flock of hundreds! I wonder if there should be a note like 'although there are distinctive elements to the dream, such is the forcefulness of the national self-image that many proponents overstate its uniqueness, often attributing it with having invented basic human motivations (such as the desire for a better life)'. Ok, so a little sarcastic :)
In general, I think we have to remember to treat The Dream as national mythology or self image. There is such a thing as 'The American Dream' which is independent of whether it actually pans out. The main point of the article should be to describe what the concept means to the people that believe it (and to clearly express that these are beliefs, not facts), not how successfully realized it is. As for the criticisms, they are probably so numerous and complex as to warrant a separate entry.

Here are the things you need to become rich: Make more good investments than bad ones (we all make mistakes)

Have determination to grow assets (don't chicken out in the middle of creating a business)

Get involved in things that you can commit to (If biochemistry doesn't interest you, don't start a biochem business)

Ha, I just came across another article that look at this issue. I initially thought of finding where this survey is hosted and start an "External links" section, but then realised someone will quickly pull it out. This is from observing the dynamics that wikipedians currenly exhibit. The pertinent paragraph follows below
"If you are born into poverty in the US," said one of its authors, "you are actually more likely to remain in poverty than in other countries in Europe, the Nordic countries, even Canada, which you would think would not be that different."
Anyway, this is the link to the BBC article that I pulled the above paragraph from. Stark reality of the American dream gathima 16:07, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

It is ashame that many of the Europeans view this as rubbish and an insult to them. When the "Dream" was coined it was because many people were leaving bad situations with the hope that the "New World" also known as America would provide them a better life. Hence the term the American Dream. Now the premise is that the "Dream" is that if you work hard and are frugal you CAN not you will definitely become more prosperous. More prosperous meaning you will be better off then you are now, and this is true. The fact is in the United States you can compile wealth through hard work, is that true in other countries most likely yes, but when the term "the American Dream" was coined the place where the opportunity could be found was the United States. I have been witness to many immigrants coming to the US with nothing and through hard work and perserverance do very well for themselves. What you are missing is these immigrants do not come from Europe anymore they come from South East Asia and South America, the same as many African and Asians move to European countries for opportunity.

[edit] External links needs more balance

I just passed by this article and it seems that all the external links are critiques of the American Dream. This indicates a subtle, but noticeable imbalance in POV. It'd be nice if one of the contributors would be able to post some positive links as well to give the section more credibility. Just a thought.

-- Hinotori(talk)|(ctrb) 23:12, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

There is another possibility. The whole dogma is so unrealistic nobody can write an article supportive of the idea without pulling out his/her hair. Seach around for such articles and you will be amaized by who thin they are. I can't help laughing to death when reading some of them. [4]


I've been searching for articles which support the American Dream with hard data, but can't find any. All data suggests that it's harder to get rich in the US than it is in other wealthy western countries. 217.196.239.189 11:34, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cleanup/Paragraph Spacing

Looking at this article espcially the first section (Historical Background) this article needs to be spaces out a bit more, as having large blocks of text to read is distracting. Also wikifying that section might be good too... (Ill probably come back later today to do some wikifying) --KaiAdin 13:48, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bear in Mind

"They call it the 'American Dream' because you have to be asleep to believe it." -- George Carlin

[edit] The entire content of this section

I have been studying the concept of the American Dream for years and the content in this section simply does not match what I have seen scholars across disciplines talk about when they discuss the American Dream. But I wouldn't even know where to start with rewriting this rather odd collection of half-developed ideas. The wording is strange (the American Dream as a "faith"?), the pictures inappropriate, and the examples, like the Dot.com one, put too much emphasis on making a lot of money fast. This idea, whether you like it or not, has a rich, deep history that has guided much of American culture for 2 centuries. Is it worth starting over with a less slanted and more informed essay?

Most of these pictures and captions have nothing to do with the article. 172.184.132.171 06:31, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The historic facts

I was just doing some research on the American Dream for school and it seems no good resources can be found. What I'd really like to know is when the idea was originally brought up, who coined the term, who first wrote about, especially defined it. I always thought the American Dream was that through hard work and determination you can gain wealth, be as money or something else and eventually end up in a higher social class to give back to your community. - JHY

Hey, the term was first coined by James Truslow Adams in 1931, and primarily used it as a term to "describe his vision of a society open to individual achievement". It was thought to have been popularized due to the time the term was announced, shortly after the Great Depression hit, when people needed something to revitalize them and give them hope. -- MacAddct1984  23:44, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] suggestion

might it be a good idea to expand more on examples of fulfillment/failure/differing views of the American Dream? just a thought --M1ss1ontomars2k4 03:29, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Innate Intelligence

Perhaps I misenerpreted the meaning of 'intelligence', but I question the validity of the following statement: "It also fails to take inheritable traits such as intelligence and physical attributes into account".

Has IQ been proven experimentally and rationally to correlate with genetics? Aside from memory retention and other proven phenotypical attributes, I am unaware of IQ being an inheritable trait.

I would also like to raise the question of legitimacy of IQ scores in accurate indication of one's intelligence (relevant to the ability to succeed socially, politically, and financially). If these things have indeed been logically substanciated please inform me. Flux 08:06, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't know if I.Q. is inherited, but certainly a poor person with a low I.Q. will have more difficulty in getting rich than a poor person with a high I.Q. Also, the quality of education tends to vary based on wealth, giving the rich an advantage in that respective. BTW, please sign your comments by adding four tildes ~~~~ after your comments. Emmett5 16:51, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Is it truly proven or evident that such a statement is true? Please find a viable source of data. I agree that it seems logical at a glance. However, ironically, it is my opinion that subjectivity isn't what this site is about. Flux 08:06, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Encyclopedic Content

I feel the content of this article is unnecessarily 'depressing' (see POV) which is against how an encyclopedia should be written. We should revamp to include a balanced and neutral version. 60.50.255.147 20:15, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

What do you think is depressing about it? Can you be more specific? I'll change it if you can give me some good reasons about what needs to be changed, why it needs to be changed, et cetera..-- The ikiroid  21:31, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Comparisons with other countries

I think this article is a bit solipsistic and the criticisms paragraph is really lacking in any sort of coherence.

We need some sort of discussion of how the ability to make money, or rise out of poverty in America differs from other capitalist countries, if indeed it does?

Also, what about the role of education? Isn't that one of the main criticisms of the American Dream? In most European countries, higher education is free, whereas in the US, poorer students need to gain a scholarship to enter the best universities. And what about nepotism, don't family connections make a huge difference?

The article just seems a bit one-sided.

[edit] NPOV Disputed on Criticism Section

Many of the criticisms listed in this section are not only highly controversial in their contents, but are provided without any balanced discussion or citations. This entire section should be re-written. It's fine if these criticism are included, but it should be pointed out that the bases of most of them are hotly disputed at best. Instead, they are being presented as if they are innocuous and mainstream. This section of the article reads like far-left political propaganda rather than a balanced review of criticism.

Ertyqway July 14, 2006

Hmmmmm - unlike much of the rest of the article which reads like corporate propoganda - to me the only POV content in this section is the inclusion of a misleading photo with the vague title “Harvard University offers a free college education to all accepted students from low-income U.S. families” How many students exactly?

Aside from that, the photo surely does not belong in this section which is after all entitled “Criticism”.

--Damnbutter 16:37, 8 August 2006 (UTC)


Isn't the whole point of the criticism section that it offers a counterbalance to the rest of the article which is very uncritical of the concept. And what is so controversial- higher education in the US is expensive and often involves prohibitive amounts of debt, even if some students get grants. America does have lower social mobility than some other countries with a similar level of development- this point is backed from evidence from a major international organization (the OECD). Where the hardline communist propaganda in that?

Partly why social mobility is lower is because Americans (or at least the classic Americans who believe in the American Dream) also believe that the government shouldn't help people achieve their goals, only provide the conditions wherein the goals are possible to obtain. 24.90.172.131 14:29, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mcarthyism

There was concern about the undemocratic campaign known as McCarthyism carried on against suspected Communists.

Ain't that absolutely POV???

TommyStardust 20:27, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Isn't the title "Criticism" inherently another point of view?

I think it is silly to add POV to a section called "Criticism!" It's a redundancy. Yeah, the criticism is a bit left because the American Dream is often pushed by the right as a way to keep the poor where they are. I also think the whole POV label is b.s. Unless you are talking about undisputed facts that everyone agrees on, it's a matter of POV. The fact that there are some entries and not others in Wikipedia is an unsaid bias. The fact that the American Dream is this entry, but "criticism" is relegated to a POV, is a bias. Criticism of the American Dream, the Myth of Meritocracy (which has no entry) could be an entry unto itself. greenwoodjr

[edit] Disagree with Assertion

I haven't thought of a better way to place it or remove it, but the first paragraph has the following: "As of right now, the American dream is a dream of having 2 children and living in a perfect house with financial security."

I disagree with it and want to know who the hell came up with that. Two children, who decided that? What's "perfect" and what is "financial security?"

I was always under the impression that the American Dream was making yourself something big, becoming something great, making something out of your life. Not "boring life with 2 children and enough money."

I highly dispute this part of the article. --Mystalic 00:30, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, it's not so much the American Dream as it is the '50s Ideal.


[edit] Am

I the only person who has the sense that much of this is written like the Libertarian Party platform, or, possibly the Republican't Party, or, even the Democan't Party??,...??

hopiakuta 23:48, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

I've found that "Republican_Party_(Ireland)" leads to "Fianna_Fáil". Does "Fáil" mean "political party", or "fail", or what?? "Fianna" "...were Irish warrior-hunters,..."

hopiakuta 00:01, 5 October 2006 (UTC) poopy


[edit] The "other" American Dream

Most of you are forgetting the work of a very important hero in the fight for the American Dream: Hunter S. Thompson. Many of popular society only viewed him in the light of Hollywood and in the character portrayed by Johnny Depp in the film "Fear and Loathin in Las Vegas." Though most of the film has been believed to be fact, the point still goes consistantly missed. Hunter S. Thompson's fight for the survival of the American Dream lied solely within truth and noncorruption. He was simply fighting to keep strong the foundation penned by our forfathers during this country's creation. His battle, which he believed finally to have been "****ed" upon his failure to enter the government body, was in disregard of any monetary desire. Yes, too often people believe that what they really want is two cars and a house, when in reality the American Dream lies in simply holding our country sacred and in the genuine pride in actually BEING an American. Thank you. ~Bo Hotchkiss

[edit] Literary examples?

There are loads of books out there that revolve around the American Dream. Perhaps those should be mentioned, in order to make the meaning of the American Dream clearer. I suggest The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald. 01:49, 25 October 2006 (UTC)Snurtz

Indeed. The Jungle by Upton Sinclair is also relevant. DarkSideOfTheSpoon 03:36, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck is another book in which the pursuit of the American Dream is a major theme. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.210.10.104 (talk) 15:17, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Didn't get the memo

Kinda like North Korea and Cuba. This user didn't get the memo that communism died in the early 1990's. By that, I mean, history has played out to show that many of these criticisms are not valid, or at the very least, not problematic overall. If they were, the USSR or another command economy would have established itself as an economic superpower. -NATESOR

[edit] effort to take the POV tag off

The criticism section needs a major overhaul. First of all it's trying to cover 2 things at once. One is a criticism of the actual dream and what it hopes to achieve, the other is showing that not all Americans live this way. I think they should be split accordingly around the 6th point which begins to talk about Higher Education. Here are a few points I want to change to make the whole thing less POV after the split is made. These edits will be made in a week or two if no one objects.

1. The title. "The American Dream Downfall" Isn't the title of the section enough? 2."Consumerism and Economic materialism: Its emphasis on material possessions as a way of finding happiness is seen by critics as being somewhat superficial or meaningless. Many literary works level exactly that criticism at the American Dream, such as Arthur Miller's play Death of a Salesman. The play, a classic American work of literature, finds the main character Willy Loman struggling to come to grips with the fact that his American Dream is unattainable."

The last sentence is unnecessary, just put an internal link to Death of a Salesman and the reader can find it's synopsis there. I think there should also be a "literary" section to the whole article added, which I'll do when I make these edits to include criticisms such as Death of a Salesman, A Raisin in the Sun and the Great Gatsby as well as things like Horatio Alger's books which lay the foundation for the "rags to riches" aspect.

3."The concept of the American Dream also ignores other factors of success such as luck, family, language, and wealth one is born into.[citation needed] Proponents of the dream argue that starting wealth is irrelevant because of the belief that there is no level of poverty from which one cannot rise with hard work and determination.[citation needed]"

I don't think the concept of the American Dream ignores the "wealth one is born into" at all, in fact that's what a lot of it is based on, as mentioned in the introduction. The American Dream, ideally, works despite socio-economic background -- rags to riches. Therefore I would simply put here: "The concept of the American Dream also ignores other factors of success such as luck, family and language.[citation needed]"

4. "Some consider the American dream to be having two children and living in a house with financial security. Currently this iconic middle class lifestyle is however not lived by the majority of the population but rather only by a sizable minority."

I'm not sure why this is a criticism of the Dream. No where in the article or in any research I've read on the dream has there been a claim that a majority of Americans ever achieve it, I think the point is that ideally anyone who works hard enough should be able to achieve it. To me it would be better here to challenge the ideal of the nuclear family which is intrinsically biased against things like a traditional Chinese family where 3 generations live in the household.

The points which I'm going to assume aim to show how not everyone is living the American Dream are also POV. I guess these are meant as a sort of reality check.

5. "Higher Education ... college degree."

There just needs to be a sentence in the beginning such as "The high paying jobs in the United States increasingly require some sort of college or university degree." and then jump into why this is hard to come by for lower income families. But really this whole section has to keep in mind that I'm not sure anyone ever said achieving the dream would be easy.

6."Economies of scale – It can be difficult to successfully start a business. One reason is because of the economies of scale necessary to survive in a commoditized market, although many markets today are not commoditized."

Why is this relevant?

7."Ethical differences – As in other countries, actions considered ethical vary between Americans. For example, a CEO who sees certain stock options as excessive monetary gain would find it harder to attain great wealth than one with a different viewpoint."

I would replace the comment in it's entirety with something closer to "The original American Dream

8."The American dream may have an overtone and influence in promoting materialism philosophy with herd instinct effects."

This needs to be cited to something and separated into different points and put in the first section. The materialism is already mentioned, I can't back up the herd mentality because I've never heard that criticism before but if someone can back it up that's fine.

Let me know what you think!Omishark 03:42, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Not knowing how to post my own two bits, I've added them here: In Iowa, during high school, I was taught that the American Dream (in general terms) was to leave future generations in a better world. Dan

[edit] It was tagged as not neutral and now I see why.

Why this? This is definately a push toward the American side of the story: "This allowed unprecedented freedom, especially the possibility of dramatic upward social mobility." That ain't right. that sentence ain't even necessary. -RadSkat3 14:49, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Actual income in the US section

This image is a bit odd. It looks like something you'd see on CNN or the nightly news, but not an encylopedia article. I've never seen anything like it on the wiki, and the information would better presented in a table or a paragraph. Cell phone users, screen reader users, Lynx users, etc, can't see it. --Transfinite 17:49, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Request to have page locked

Due to vandalism, I think this page should be locked, preventing editing by unregistered or new members. I'd take out the vandalism myself, but I don't have the time, and/or desire to right now. Davepetr 20:52, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Agree. There is way too much vandalism on this page. I say lock it up--FivePointCalvinist (My Friends Call me 'Cal') 01:49, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Meritocracy?

The opening paragraphs of this article twice mention "meritocracy" as an American (or capitalist) characteristic; this is debatable at best, "opportunity" might be a more accurate word here, but the playing field is too far from level to call our current economic system anything like truly merit-based. How many people actually make it to the top using only their own skills and hard work? Just a tiny fraction of those who struggle to make ends meet. Noclevername 21:15, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

While this can sometimes be true, the fact is that the American Dream is inextricably linked with meritocracy. The American dream is that if you work hard, you will be rewarded by merit. Whether this truly happens in our current economic system is irrelevant. Besides, a lot of positions today are truly merit-based. Sure, there is corruption, but hey, people still view it as meritocracy, or else people would stop trying to gain promotions...--FivePointCalvinist (My Friends Call me 'Cal') 01:48, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Removed POV tag

I cleaned up much of the poorly sourced or WP:OR material from criticisms, which seemed like the only truly contentious section. I also removed POV tag. Ronnotel 04:34, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Requesting Semi-protection

Self-explanatory. People keep vandalizing this article. AllStarZ 18:33, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

I had an old hippie tell me the last place you can find the American Dream is in Oslo, Norway. Anyone have any idea why?

[edit] Wow...

The vandals got the page bad, could we have semi-protect? --Whstchy 23:25, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "Expression" section

The Expression section seems arbitrary and unsourced. Simply listing any song that includes the phrase "American Dream" is of little encyclopedic value, and the films & books listed are without any annotation or citation. I propose removing the entire section as original research. --ZimZalaBim talk 18:19, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Since no opposition has been expressed, I'm going to start trimming this section. --ZimZalaBim talk 22:06, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
Someone was bold and simply got rid of the entire section. Since this section was always a bit difficult, I decided to let the edit stand for now. --Ben James Ben 19:03, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Add a section on people who have been left out of the American Dream?

I think it would be valuable to add something like "The American Dream of property ownership and equal participation in economic life did not initially apply to all immigrants, or even all residents of the country. By the 20th century, with Socialism giving the voiceless the courage to speak out, the disempowered began to agitate in large numbers. The 20th century civil rights movements of women, blacks and other ethnic minorities have largely been directed at giving them the same access to the American Dream as white males." Comments?Sofia Roberts 04:47, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

That would be valuable...if you can provide citations to back up the assertions. Otherwise, this appears to be your own analysis of the situation. --ZimZalaBim talk 14:40, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
This link[5] talks about a study which has shown that children growing up in poverty in Europe are more likely to get out of that poverty than children born into poverty in the US. This is surely worth a mention, but I'm not sure the exact phrasing. Damburger 16:54, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
That's more apprpriate at an article about poverty or class mobility in the US. --ZimZalaBim talk 18:03, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
I thought the American Dream is about a lad from the streets getting rich through personal effort and ingenuity? At least that's one interpretation of it. If so, you've a better chance with the Danish Dream or the Canadian Dream - something that probably ought to be mentioned somewhere. I will see if there is anywhere in the article that is appropriate for this information without it disrupting the flow. Damburger 09:21, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism of "Historical background"

I've noticed a pattern of vandalism of this article specifically where the "Historical background" section keeps getting blanked: [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] These edits were made from different IP addresses. However, because of the specific nature of the edits, I suspect that one person might be behind them. It would be a great coincidence to have multiple vandals vandalising the same specific section in the same specific way. (I note that a similar pattern of vandalism was previously performed on the "Expression" section. But, eventually the removal of that section was left alone since the article was better off without it. See the discussion above.) I'm not sure what could or should be done about this type of vandalism, but I wanted people to be aware of the issue. --Ben James Ben 05:26, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

I have restored the historical section because I think it's important to show how the concept of "American Dream" has changed over the years. A little research even on electronic databases shows that the pre-Industrial Era concept of the AD was much more concerned with the destiny of the country and the challenge of adapting European people to this new land (physically and mentally) than today. (The materialism was there too, but less prominently.) What I've added is definitely a work in progress, and I want to see references added to the variety of shades of meaning the AD has had. I would eventually like to have the three components of the AD receive separate subsections, and have a distinction made between the social science concept of the AD and the various literary concepts of the AD that have been published over the past 4 centuries.Sofia Roberts 05:41, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Quotes

Why are all the quotations referring to the American Dream critical of it? Can we not find more revelent ones? I suggest to put all criticism into one section and leave the rest of the article open for the actual concept of the American Dream, which, by the way, brought here tens of millions of people. Please discuss, thank you, (209.7.171.66 19:54, 15 October 2007 (UTC))

I agree that quotations should be both positive and negative. However, it seems to me it will take a while for people to discuss whether the three ideas "America as the land of plenty, America as the land of opportunity, and America as the land of destiny" as well as the American Dream as homeownership are adequate to encompass the concept. Once we settle on what the American dream can mean, getting appropriate quotations that won't get deleted will be easier. Sofia Roberts 19:57, 17 October 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Re: New Problems (23/11/07)

I also noticed that somebody found it cute to put "THE AMERICAN DREAM IS GONE etc. etc." In big, bold letters along the Introductory statement.

I'm not American (Canadian, actually), but I still think it's stupid to put something like that up here.

Keep your "Political Statements" on your own activist websites. Wikipedia is supposed to be a neutral zone, just because it's in vogue to hate the States doesn't mean you should soil the reputation of Wikipedia with your e-protests.

Could anyone with proper clearance rectify this? Sorry, it just annoys me when people exploit anonymity to "Stick it to the man" or whatever romantacized hallucination they think their actions are. Like whenever anyone edits the George Bush page.

-DuckmanDrake (Wish I new all of those fancy HTML codings, sadly I'm just doing this in-between other computer programming work.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by DuckmanDrake (talk • contribs) 18:55, 23 November 2007 (UTC)


[edit] New Problems (21/11/07)

in the intro the words "friggin retard" are used. Because it is in the intro, i cant edit it. How can that be describing "The American Dream"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by LoOkLeFt (talk • contribs) 20:33, 21 November 2007 (UTC)


[edit] 12/6/07: Additional Content & Some Revision

Sociological consideration of the concept the American Dream was incorporated into the previously existing entry. Further revision is warranted. I particularly appreciate an aforementioned comment on evaluation of the AD from a literary perspective (distinct from a social science perspective).

Jkenty (talk) 05:29, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Page Corruption

I was wondering if anyone knows what happened to this page, as somewhere along the line it lost all of its Wikipedia formatting, and became a corrupted, jumbled mess resembling a paper rather than a page. I tried to reestablish some semblance of Wikipedia style, but one of the more arduous processes is going to be unbreaking the footnotes, so that there is an actual reference list, rather than a copy/pasted version of the old one. If anyone else has an interest in this page, a little restructuring according to Wikipedia style is greatly needed here. -Nik-renshaw (talk) 03:05, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

I mean, should we just revert to the December 2nd version of the page, and then re-add the material that is properly sourced? The whole thing is just kind of a mess at this point. -Nik-renshaw (talk) 03:14, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Just having stumbled across this as an 'uncategorised page', I'd agree with Nik-renshaw - revert to the December 2nd (Wetman) version. The version created by Johnielle927 seems to be verging on the edge of violating WP:NPOV, and probably WP:NOR (IMHO) CultureDrone (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 00:30, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Attention Johnielle927: Regarding Class Project

Johnielle927,

It's great that you guys are doing a class project to improve this page, but the goals of Wikipedia must always supersede any other concerns, like your project. If you are going to improve the page, do it within the guidelines of Wikipedia, and do it collaboratively to create the best possible encyclopedic page on the given topic. That means you should get on the talk page here, and work with the people who are already interested in this page to improve it, rather than just displacing the work that has already been done with yours. We can all be of benefit to each other, as long as we don't get into a reversion war. -Nik-renshaw (talk) 22:13, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Collaboration, anyone?

Hi folks. So there are tons of people currently editing this article, clearly with different visions of how it should be organized, and what precisely it should say. Anyone want to actually talk this out, rather than just changing what other people do? For example, we now have a whole list of qualifiers for the American Dream that fall erroneously under the section heading "Race and the American Dream," because someone didn't like the section heading "Components." I don't want to just change it to something I personally happen to like without talking to some of you, and figuring out what the best route is here. Please, let's get a dialogue going, because this page is messy right now. -Nik-renshaw (talk) 20:28, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism / I Enjoy Talking to Myself

Hey, I was wondering if there was a good way to trace those edits back to the particular school they obviously came from, report it to said school, and get some annoying children suspended. mean, they were leaving their names, for goodness' sake. Anyone? Nik-renshaw (talk) 02:28, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes there probably is a way (look at the template on two of the IP's pages), I am just too tired from reverting those scamps to care.—Cronholm144 02:46, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
I don't think you can get them suspended, but the vandalism might be heavy enough for WP:RPP. -Yamanbaiia (talk) 13:49, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
It has already been semi-protected for two weeks. You are right, not suspended per se, but abuse reports to the school administrators are fair game.—Cronholm144 15:14, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
I don't know. I mean, I'm not saying that we will suspend them. I'm just saying that if I were a school administrator who saw my students using their time in the library (presumably) to swear on Wikipedia, then I would probably suspend them. So, anyone volunteer to take care of it? Nik-renshaw (talk) 15:46, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
It is actually too soon to file a report; They must have been blocked at least 5 times. I guess we have to bite the bullet on this one, unless you want to contact the school on a personal level, which is certainly possible. If you do contact them, you can use this to help. —Cronholm144 16:46, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Quotations

How about renaming this "in popular culture"? i know that we are trying to get rid of trivia sections but i don't see how could i add American Dreamz or The Engineers song in Miss Saigon: "My American Dream", in a section named "Quotations". No one else wants a complete section about the American Dream in pop culture? -Yamanbaiia (talk) 13:49, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

I think it would be a good section to have, as long as it was more than just a list of people or bands that reference it. If anyone could find research on pop-culture references to it, and changes over time, then combine that with the aforementioned list, then I think it would be worthwhile. Nik-renshaw (talk) 15:48, 14 December 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Terrible Article, Proposed Changes

Reading through the talk sections, I don't think that what I'll say will be any different from what has already been said. This is a very sub-par wikipedia article. Much of the article is focused on a critique of the American Dream, except that the critique has been integrated into the article itself instead of having its own separate section. Thus, the conventional definition of the American Dream has not been clearly given. Instead of acknowledging the flaws of the American Dream in the main article, all the diverging views of the AD should be put in a separate article or at least be appended to the end of the definition and be clearly labeled as such.

My first problem begins with: "The definition of the American Dream is now under constant discussion and debate.[1] Also "The package of beliefs, assumptions, and action patterns that social scientists have labeled the American Dream has always been a fragile agglomeration of (1) individual freedom of choice in life styles, (2) equal access to economic abundance, and (3) the pursuit of shared objectives mutually advantageous to the individual and society." [2]"

Sure there is a debate about the concept, but does it really belong at near the beginning of the article in such length? At most there should be a note that directs a reader to further exploration of the issue in a criticism section.

Furthermore, this article reads too much like a poorly written high school research paper. Though it seems like the entire article contains a diverse range of authors cited, within each sub-section only one author's ideas are explicated. This seems highly suspicious as it may indicate a possible non-consensus on the issue and thus should not be worthy of mention in wikipedia.

For example, in the wealth, working class, and home ownership sub-sections, only one author is cited. Furthermore, Jennifer Hochschild is used almost exclusively for the entire half of the article. She and maybe 3 others take up a large portion of the citations. This is extremely poor form and I suspect someone just copied and pasted part of a school research paper onto this article.

To fix this, I will suggest that we decide on a format for this article. I am partial to:

-Intro
-Definition
-History
-Criticism (w/ alternate spins on definition included herin)
-Misc

Much of the article can be cut down to make it leaner and more focused.

Finally, here is my take on the American Dream: It is the hope that your future life and posterity will be better off than you are now.

Its that simple. The Dream's down to earth simplicity is what made it appealing to immigrant masses in the first place. Of course this is not uniquely American or even a uniquely modern idea, but it doesn't have to be since the Dream was something that has a historical context that all nations recognize as being uniquely American. America was once and still is regarded as a place of opportunity for those that work for it. It was also the first place that allowed for mass social mobility since it was a country that had no true aristocratic history. It is also a meritocratic ideal, despite whether the ideal reflects reality, though I believe that it does. MasonicLamb (talk) 06:40, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] This article is hopeless. Would protection help?

I've been following this admittedly difficult article for several months after trying to fix it, and it's been repeatedly vandalized and changed by people who seem to have not read the article and simply want to post parts of their term papers without integrating any new information into the existing article. Unfortunately, the topic of "American Dream" is a natural for high school and college study, and this site gets more than its share of vandalism, and uninformed and overly enthusiastic edits. What we need is a link to a page called "Term Papers about the American Dream" to drain off this traffic, or some kind of protection for the page so that only established users can edit it. I don't think "indefinite semi-protection" would be enough, though. I'm giving up on trying to stabilize it.Sofia Roberts (talk) 20:58, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

I believe that the term paper crowd is finished. It was a class project for them, and they kind of unbalanced the whole article. However, for about the last two months, nothing has really changed except for minor grammatical corrections. At this point, if someone actually took the time to go through and improve the article, I don't think there would be anyone to mess it up again. And then, the next time a different class or student comes around to insert their material, we just have to take a firmer stance on rejecting their additions, unless they are encyclopedic. So, whoever is up for the task, go ahead and fix it up. :-) Nik-renshaw (talk) 18:30, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
I have deleted the last sentence of the section "From American Dream to American Reality". First, its grammar and spelling are atrocious. Second, it makes a very similar point to the previous sentence. Third, the cited study actually says that "the United States displays a relatively high mobility in education and occupations and a rather low mobility in income" (p. 67). So this section of the article is making the assumption that the American dream is only about making more money than your parents, which is not how the article defines the American dream in the opening paragraph. Marsoult (talk) 16:42, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
First, sorry for my english. I mean it's not a good idea to delete the reference to the OECD's study, which is a complete review of the topic (mobility), and therefore a very interesting document for the readers. It should be better to use it to improve this section.--ELeng (talk) 07:18, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Suggestions

This article is, as noted before, highly unbalanced. A good chunk of it needs to be scrapped, as it reads less like "Encylopedia entry on the American Dream" and more like "Attempted Dissection of Misrepresented American Dream". As the peer review notes, the dream is a concept, not a reality. It also seems to be an idea nobody really grasps. I suggest the following definition for the Dream. The American Dream is: a belief that a person can be whoever or whatever they want, so long as they are willing to put forth the work and take on the risks associated with their ideal. The Dream doesn't involve economic prosperity, and to suggest that it does ignores the individualist themes of the Dream. It isn't one set goal, it's a method of achieving a personal goal. Saying that you have to have wealth to "live the Dream" creates a universal societal goal in direct opposition to the concept of personal freedom, which goes hand in hand with the Dream. —El Pez Dispenser (talk) 19:00, 30 May 2008 (UTC) comment added by El Pez Dispenser (talk • contribs) 18:45, 30 May 2008 (UTC)