Page 155 - Šolsko polje, XXVIII, 2017, no. 3-4: Education and the American Dream, ed. Mitja Sardoč
P. 155
d. štrajn ■ perversion of the american dream
the maintenance of educational quality” (p. 125). In his later work Lasch
himself became aware of the gist of his discoveries. In 1991 he deals with
the contexts of transformations, which he exposed in his most influential
book two decades earlier. “The condescension and contempt with which
so many historians look back on nineteenth-century populism imply that
the twentieth century has somehow learned how to reconcile freedom and
equality with the wage system, modern finance, and the corporate organi-
zation of economic life. Nothing in the history of our times, however, jus-
tifies such complacency” (Lasch, 1991a: p. 225).
The key contradiction “hidden” within the American Dream is root-
ed in many diverse visions of individualism as a foundation of freedom.
Michael Peters in retrospect confirms Lasch’s critical observations an-
other two decades later at the time of financial crisis. Referring to James
O’Connor and his analysis of corporate capitalism, Peters affirms that,
/…/ while capitalist accumulation created the basis for the development
of modern ideologies of individualism – anti-statism, privatisation, au-
tonomy, self-development, and laissez-faire – American individualism
became self-contradictory and illusory as corporate capitalism devel-
oped. Centralised state activity and corporate capitalism replaced priva-
cy and freedom from interference with passivity, dependence, the colo-
nisation of individual wills (2011: p. 36).
Where is the American Dream in such circumstances? While it is
clear that the spread of neoliberal ideology and the according organisation
of economy in global dimensions blurs differences between the American
and other collective dreams elsewhere, it is also evident that in its pervert-
ed meaning this dream, this point of identification, misperceived as an
metaphoric construct, helps through media, advertising, political propa-
ganda – most recently in the form of “fake news” – operating the “desir-
ing-machine” in Delueze’s and Guattari’s sense. It would take much more
than this article to explain and understand the “dialectics” between the
individual’s and the collective’s dreams. How much the dreams of an indi-
vidual are inscribed in the shared dreaming and vice versa? Therefore, we
can guess that the American Dream at its present state demonstrates that
illusions and imaginary self-fulfilment produce the encoded “realities”,
which make an individual a part of a collective. An individual then “feels”
as an individual in the context, in which his individuality and freedom are
absorbed. The Emersonian spirit of self-accomplishment is long ago gone
from this metaphorical dreaming, which became “external” for individu-
als subsisting on imaginary reality. The latter has its roots in consumer so-
ciety, which is by far the greatest contribution to the world history by the
153
the maintenance of educational quality” (p. 125). In his later work Lasch
himself became aware of the gist of his discoveries. In 1991 he deals with
the contexts of transformations, which he exposed in his most influential
book two decades earlier. “The condescension and contempt with which
so many historians look back on nineteenth-century populism imply that
the twentieth century has somehow learned how to reconcile freedom and
equality with the wage system, modern finance, and the corporate organi-
zation of economic life. Nothing in the history of our times, however, jus-
tifies such complacency” (Lasch, 1991a: p. 225).
The key contradiction “hidden” within the American Dream is root-
ed in many diverse visions of individualism as a foundation of freedom.
Michael Peters in retrospect confirms Lasch’s critical observations an-
other two decades later at the time of financial crisis. Referring to James
O’Connor and his analysis of corporate capitalism, Peters affirms that,
/…/ while capitalist accumulation created the basis for the development
of modern ideologies of individualism – anti-statism, privatisation, au-
tonomy, self-development, and laissez-faire – American individualism
became self-contradictory and illusory as corporate capitalism devel-
oped. Centralised state activity and corporate capitalism replaced priva-
cy and freedom from interference with passivity, dependence, the colo-
nisation of individual wills (2011: p. 36).
Where is the American Dream in such circumstances? While it is
clear that the spread of neoliberal ideology and the according organisation
of economy in global dimensions blurs differences between the American
and other collective dreams elsewhere, it is also evident that in its pervert-
ed meaning this dream, this point of identification, misperceived as an
metaphoric construct, helps through media, advertising, political propa-
ganda – most recently in the form of “fake news” – operating the “desir-
ing-machine” in Delueze’s and Guattari’s sense. It would take much more
than this article to explain and understand the “dialectics” between the
individual’s and the collective’s dreams. How much the dreams of an indi-
vidual are inscribed in the shared dreaming and vice versa? Therefore, we
can guess that the American Dream at its present state demonstrates that
illusions and imaginary self-fulfilment produce the encoded “realities”,
which make an individual a part of a collective. An individual then “feels”
as an individual in the context, in which his individuality and freedom are
absorbed. The Emersonian spirit of self-accomplishment is long ago gone
from this metaphorical dreaming, which became “external” for individu-
als subsisting on imaginary reality. The latter has its roots in consumer so-
ciety, which is by far the greatest contribution to the world history by the
153
